Datasets:

stenio123

/

1000GovPdfLibraryCongress-vector

like 0

[ -0.058782439678907394, 0.047077957540750504, -0.05439136177301407, 0.08505355566740036, -0.06729459017515182, -0.05753103271126747, -0.06278467178344727, 0.045160215348005295, -0.017740735784173012, -0.11824197322130203, -0.01631666161119938, 0.011595843359827995, 0.08486317843198776, -0.11434288322925568, 0.01323713269084692, 0.014740271493792534, 0.09948497265577316, -0.032326847314834595, -0.05221857503056526, -0.02499585598707199, -0.04914897307753563, -0.008501216769218445, -0.017329225316643715, -0.01549349445849657, 0.0046867732889950275, 0.01983741857111454, -0.031645696610212326, -0.002768327947705984, 0.0023375009186565876, -0.03883283585309982, -0.01006871834397316, -0.013672859407961369, -0.12912696599960327, 0.05041217803955078, -0.0211477130651474, 0.014318115077912807, -0.03538353741168976, 0.015244035981595516, 0.0024906517937779427, 0.0999416932463646, -0.03729880601167679, 0.039670106023550034, 0.04434320703148842, -0.019266214221715927, -0.028382916003465652, -0.016333434730768204, -0.021206380799412727, -0.06209961697459221, -0.1360730677843094, -0.01985607109963894, 0.08757654577493668, 0.09528254717588425, 0.015243275091052055, 0.062382861971855164, -0.02677430957555771, 0.012219786643981934, -0.025753051042556763, 0.012988579459488392, -0.007548297289758921, -0.03456614911556244, 0.07034894078969955, -0.006746447179466486, 0.005871295463293791, -0.013632968999445438, 0.00725500239059329, -0.010500199161469936, 0.048284802585840225, 0.08306590467691422, 0.04356105998158455, -0.033869702368974686, 0.01018401701003313, 0.0014499714598059654, -0.02458423748612404, -0.07137046754360199, -0.0059515307657420635, 0.003745324444025755, 0.03850504010915756, -0.07109427452087402, 0.05616690218448639, 0.007127105724066496, 0.01830480992794037, -0.05076150223612785, -0.05940322205424309, -0.15539905428886414, -0.05715849995613098, 0.028365038335323334, -0.02975582517683506, 0.007118088658899069, -0.002410187618806958, 0.018109317868947983, 0.015489470213651657, 0.011794164776802063, -0.006785727106034756, 0.014746541157364845, 0.05772965028882027, 0.05517018213868141, 0.08187827467918396, -0.017029669135808945, -0.02384975738823414, 0.04058768227696419, 0.09575391560792923, -0.006398316938430071, -0.036218538880348206, 0.07906065136194229, -0.07532419264316559, -0.06160081923007965, 0.09806110709905624, 0.1279175728559494, -0.0848822221159935, -0.005195493809878826, 0.03408784419298172, 0.017429957166314125, -0.01684262603521347, -0.04045277461409569, 0.027691591531038284, 0.020179327577352524, -0.03438473865389824, 0.09308808296918869, 0.030300254002213478, -0.07387516647577286, 0.07039248198270798, -0.021394412964582443, -0.0006450341898016632, -0.020541759207844734, -0.0012758357916027308, -0.0021868848707526922, -0.057352907955646515, 1.7900183691902014e-33, 0.0479416698217392, 0.027957888320088387, -0.028980592265725136, -0.0018017959082499146, -0.029429936781525612, -0.004174635745584965, 0.012203487567603588, -0.021204369142651558, -0.06273365765810013, 0.04825938120484352, 0.02932327799499035, 0.0199684277176857, -0.010806156322360039, -0.06006992235779762, -0.008887593634426594, -0.058709144592285156, -0.010985950008034706, 0.06486629694700241, -0.06042111665010452, 0.04477055370807648, 0.05769926309585571, 0.013766612857580185, -0.016306057572364807, 0.03126457706093788, 0.0005589992506429553, 0.008155574090778828, -0.024245817214250565, 0.04549882188439369, -0.1271713674068451, 0.0460066944360733, 0.024251384660601616, 0.08388188481330872, 0.020744645968079567, -0.025966685265302658, 0.0391862690448761, -0.06379695236682892, 0.004463505931198597, 0.0396401584148407, 0.03192438557744026, -0.05129281431436539, 0.07135409116744995, 0.015689387917518616, 0.011080310679972172, 0.005570719484239817, 0.05513538047671318, -0.0216045118868351, 0.09618330001831055, 0.06262550503015518, -0.00969382468611002, -0.02302343025803566, -0.020326709374785423, 0.032901205122470856, -0.11170220375061035, 0.036114610731601715, 0.10424892604351044, 0.028163310140371323, 0.05557128041982651, 0.02604774199426174, 0.04981260001659393, 0.040318988263607025, -0.041302427649497986, 0.004939251579344273, -0.017491238191723824, -0.06786524504423141, -0.02569022960960865, 0.043020155280828476, -0.12334474176168442, -0.06492194533348083, -0.010217657312750816, 0.0678265243768692, 0.06483189761638641, 0.06086265295743942, 0.0021203395444899797, -0.066054567694664, 0.12189067155122757, -0.02299690991640091, -0.02498897910118103, 0.05574304983019829, -0.041937388479709625, 0.017412109300494194, -0.07664775103330612, -0.036342162638902664, -0.03251596912741661, 0.00307644484564662, 0.022315407171845436, -0.04713895171880722, -0.049611806869506836, 0.05952007696032524, -0.0024849416222423315, -0.04989289492368698, 0.035422008484601974, 0.04510977864265442, 0.1162935122847557, -0.09125901758670807, -0.06374043971300125, -3.4346633520142105e-33, 0.07207915186882019, -0.004187158774584532, -0.012346914038062096, -0.008020764216780663, 0.02700052782893181, 0.08725747466087341, -0.010344692505896091, 0.042634427547454834, -0.001098428969271481, -0.08768589049577713, 0.03304087743163109, 0.006612515542656183, -0.1501375138759613, 0.0071596731431782246, 0.034300874918699265, -0.03521140292286873, 0.06856215745210648, 0.02534795179963112, 0.11344879865646362, 0.0314147062599659, 0.121358722448349, -0.07897218316793442, -0.0264232587069273, 0.04613000527024269, 0.01903144270181656, -0.056611984968185425, -0.04774368181824684, -0.15137754380702972, 0.028511762619018555, 0.08340767025947571, -0.002117457799613476, 0.0017877111677080393, 0.019059371203184128, 0.1136346384882927, -0.0037176311016082764, 0.0065928571857512, -0.005164361093193293, -0.08234595507383347, 0.007243199273943901, -0.015056949108839035, 0.012025102972984314, 0.061141010373830795, -0.0079940902069211, 0.00018033005471806973, 0.0628022700548172, 0.003284960053861141, 0.016945326700806618, -0.019798519089818, -0.007425419054925442, 0.03479733690619469, 0.010289705358445644, -0.0904846116900444, 0.00708819180727005, 0.0039416346698999405, -0.004796834662556648, 0.01247932855039835, 0.008070511743426323, 0.020972779020667076, 0.004831666126847267, -0.06922373920679092, -0.007806413806974888, -0.008497237227857113, 0.026298433542251587, -0.08426790684461594, -0.03451424837112427, -0.026939325034618378, -0.04497737064957619, 0.017980964854359627, 0.06279748678207397, 0.019826196134090424, -0.01017981581389904, -0.08031055331230164, 0.016102490946650505, -0.06913705915212631, -0.018799588084220886, -0.04982206970453262, 0.06771004945039749, -0.054972127079963684, 0.03480292111635208, -0.011483962647616863, -0.09410570561885834, 0.0719161257147789, -0.030503936111927032, -0.08048493415117264, 0.03342898190021515, -0.006018389482051134, -0.008534127846360207, -0.02246430143713951, -0.015060663223266602, 0.04605036973953247, 0.001757418503984809, -0.024981776252388954, 0.0447799488902092, -0.03335041180253029, 0.07255665212869644, -6.415326225805984e-8, 0.019971368834376335, -0.0022354319225996733, -0.11039911955595016, 0.07102949172258377, 0.06486763060092926, -0.008391561917960644, 0.004487463738769293, -0.07163803279399872, 0.1087399572134018, 0.010259909555315971, 0.056902069598436356, -0.03144550323486328, 0.019722076132893562, -0.08889339119195938, -0.015109289437532425, 0.02036677673459053, -0.08623276650905609, 0.006774557754397392, 0.010029791854321957, 0.029839707538485527, 0.04574871435761452, 0.002625359920784831, -0.0005328417755663395, -0.019093172624707222, -0.03975933790206909, 0.041329167783260345, 0.04701937362551689, -0.04307078570127487, -0.010178876109421253, 0.016411468386650085, -0.04593300446867943, -0.07077206671237946, -0.02670048363506794, -0.00028752521029673517, 0.01934204064309597, -0.0331711545586586, -0.04218311980366707, -0.02006090059876442, 0.08188490569591522, 0.08051382750272751, 0.02569565549492836, 0.02065281942486763, -0.010762201622128487, 0.023723609745502472, 0.049528490751981735, 0.07234065234661102, -0.04220631346106529, -0.11173829436302185, -0.08695224672555923, -0.006079597398638725, -0.0674947053194046, 0.024299461394548416, -0.003504706546664238, -0.00786755234003067, -0.021985281258821487, 0.09283684194087982, -0.0005880883545614779, 0.009698189795017242, -0.022286932915449142, -0.05726223811507225, 0.01705627702176571, 0.09610163420438766, -0.06203925609588623, -0.01788916625082493 ]

{ "pdf_file": "QNUOKFLA7NUJSOJ63IZBGJYX2EUW7JI3.pdf", "text": "114 Group II \nCOHERENT INSTABILITIES IN THE 20 TeV RING*) -\nE.D. Courant \nBrookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY and State University of New York, Stony Brook, \nNY, USA. \nC. Pellegrini \nBrookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, USA \nABSTRACT \nWe discuss some of the limits on the average and peak current in the \n20 TeV ring, produced by coherent .instabilities. We also discuss \nsome effects of synchrotron radiation. \n1. INTRODUCTION \nWe investigate the limitations on the performance of the 20 TeV proton ring due to co­\nherent instabilities. This investigation uses a simple model l\n) to describe the stability \n1imits, based on the asstunption that all low frequency instabilities, w< c/d, where d is \nthe vacUlUn tank dimension, can be cured by feedback. To stabilize high frequency effects \none has to rely on Landau damping. \nWe discuss the limitations on the beam intensity and beam configuration obtained from \nthis model. We also discuss some of the effects introduced by synchrotron radiation. \n2. STABILITY CRITERIA \nAs discussed in Ref. (1) we use two stability conditions, one for longitudinal effects, \nthe microwave instability, and the other for transverse effects. They can be written as \n(1) \neIZT R \nP eff (2) --'Zr\"7f-v'E\"\"--- ~ /).v \nwhere lill/E is the beam energy spread, I is the peak current in a btmch, a. is the momentum p \ncompaction factor, E is the beam energy, e is the electron charge, v the betatron frequency, \nR the machine radius, /).V the betatron frequency spread providing Landau damping, (Z/n)eff is \nthe longitudinal coupling impedance of the btmch to the surrotmding environment and \n(3) 115 p and pp machines \ny being the beam particle energy in rest energy lIDits, a the beam radius, d the vacuum tank \nradius and 20 the vacuum impedance. The last tenn in (3) describes the space charge effects \nand can be neglected for our 20 TeV ring. \nFor a beam having B blIDches, each of length L we introduce the total longitudinal emit­\ntance \n6 11 ;; B 6E L/C (4) \nthe total average current \n(5) \nand a bunch factor \n(6) \nWith the help of (4), (5) and (6) we can rewrite (1) and (2) as \n2 \n(2) a.c 611 eI -<--~­ (7)T neff -(2nR)2F EB\n(8) \nIn (8) we neglected the space charge contribution to the transverse impedance. \nOne can see from (7), (8) that a small Fis convenient to raise the longitudinal in­B\u0001 \nstability limit and a large FB to raise the transverse limit. The opt:imum value is obtained\u0001 \nwhen the two limits are equal or \na. )% (9)-(-21T-R-)-*--E ( 1TV 6v • \nFor FB < Fi we are limited by the transverse instability and for FB > F; by the longitudinal \none. Of course if Fi > 1 the transverse effect is always the limiting one. \nUsing (9) we can write (7) and (8) as \n* 2) c6II (d/R) (1Ta.V AV) % FB e IT(ii ~ 2 R F (10)eff rr L.I \nB \ne I (~) < cEil (d/R) (mlv6v) Y2 ~ • (11)T neff -2nR FB \n3. APPLICATION TO 'I1IE 20 TeV RING \nWe want to evaluate (10), (11) for the 20 TeV ring. Since a. ::: 1/v2 there is only a \nweak dependence on v and we will only evaluate (10), (11) for the case of the 'weak focusing \nring\". We use the following values: 116 Group II \n2~R = 5.7 x 10~ m -v = 60 \na = 3.4 x 10-~ \nIT = 0.84 A \nRid = 2.27 x 105 \nt:.v = 0.01 \nwhere the current corresponds to a total of 101 5 circulating protons. We obtain: \nFi =0.08 at E=1 TeV (12) \nand \nF* = 4 X 10-3 at E = 20 TeV • (13)B. \nEquations (10), (11) become \n(14) \nThe small values of Fi mean that we are mainly limited by the longitudinal instability. \nIn fact for a coasting beam at 1 TeV and for the assumed e1\\ the energy spread is very small \nlillIE ::: 2.6 x 10-5 • For FB = Fi = 0.08 the energy spread is increased to 3.3 x 10-~ • \nFor a total circulating current of 0.84 A we have from (14) that the effective longitu­\ndinal coupling impedance must satisfy the condition \n( ~) $3.5Q. (IS) neff \nThis condition need only be satisfied in the frequency range w ~ cld where feedback cannot \nbe used. .An impedance of the order of a few ohm has been obtained in the electron-positron \nstorage ring, PETRA. \n4. SYNQIROTRON RADIATION EFFECTS \nThe synchrotron radiation energy loss per turn U0, can be obtained from2 \n) \n(16) \nwhere p is the bending radius, ro the classical proton radius and mc2 the proton rest energy. \nFor an energy of 20 TeV, y = 2.13 X 10\", p = 6.68 x 103 mwe have \nUo =1.82 X 105 eV • (17) \nFor a total current IT = 0.84 A the radiated power is \nW = 152 kW • (18) 117 p and pp machines \nTo evaluate the damping times we assume that the radial and vertical betatron damping \nTh' .th . b 2)times are equal to twice the synchrotron damp1ng \" t~e, L S• 1S 1S en g1ven y \n= 2TIR ~ = 2.09 x 10~ s = 5.8 hrs • (19)LS C Uo \nThe equi1ibritml energy spread produced by radiation damping and quantlDll fluctuations \nis given by \n(20) \nwhere \n(21) \nAt 20 TeV we obtain \nE ::: 415 eV (22) c \naE 3 OS X10-6 • (23) -r= . \nThe energy spread is smaller than the value detennined by the longitudinal emittance 8II , \nwhich is 2.6 x 10-5 for a coasting beam and 6.5 x 10-3 fOT a beam with a btmching factor \nF=4 x 10-:3 and at 20 TeV. Hence, according to our present tmderstanding of the microwaveB \ninstability, as soon as the energy spread starts to decrease the btmch should become tmStable \nand the energy spread should remain at the value corresponding to the threshold of the in­\nstability. \nThe radial betatron emittance as determined by radiation alone is given by2) \nE = TIy 2R (aE)2 \n= 5.2 x 10-8 m rad x v3 E \nand is again much smaller than the emittance at injection, E tV 2TI x 10-5 m rad. The reduc­x \ntion in transverse emittance produced by radiation might become important in a p-p configura­\ntion, where the reduction in beam transverse size would increase the beam-beam ttme shift, \n!:lv, and the ltuninosity by a factor equal to the emittance ratio or about 1200. Again we ex­\npect that the beam-beam interaction will start to blow up the beams long before such a large \nincrease is reached. However we can assume that the p-p system will adjust itself to the \noptimum value of !:lv. Also the radiation damping might be helpful in cOtmteracting slow \ndiffusion processes. \ns. CONCLUSIONS \nThe results obtained in Section 3 show that coherent instabilities should not prevent \nus from reaching the design intensity of 1015 circulating protons. However to reach this \ngoal one will have to use feedback to control the low frequency instabilities and to reduce \nthe longitudinal coupling impedance to a few ohm. Also when these conditions are satisfied \none requires a very small blll1ching factor to avoid a blow up of the longitudinal phase space. \nOf course, a much more detailed analysis will be needed when the ring is designed. 118 Group II \nSynchrotron radiation effects are not negligible and can influence the beam properties \nin the storage configuration after a time of the order of ten hours. \n* * * \nREFERENCES \n1) C.\u0001 Pellegrini and M. Sands, Phenomenological analysis of current limits in storage \nrings, to be published in Nuc1. Instnnn. and Methods. \n2) M.\u0001 Sands, in Physics of Storage Rings, Internat. School of Phys. E. Fermi, Varenna, \n1969 Cede B. Touschek). \n-\u0001\n-\u0001" }

[ -0.04251754283905029, 0.04355595260858536, 0.031819283962249756, 0.011202307417988777, -0.021642714738845825, 0.05105620250105858, -0.08342134207487106, -0.0004972879542037845, -0.004111672285944223, -0.012573422864079475, 0.02101687341928482, -0.04932462051510811, -0.02639751508831978, 0.05458551272749901, -0.009380673058331013, 0.04968973249197006, 0.06445775926113129, 0.010472876951098442, -0.02830575965344906, 0.05894884839653969, -0.006450680084526539, -0.0006182268843986094, -0.025775017216801643, 0.004399262368679047, -0.010098173283040524, 0.09414303302764893, -0.06301841884851456, -0.11190875619649887, 0.020437348634004593, 0.03423454985022545, 0.13745296001434326, -0.00994859728962183, 0.031930722296237946, -0.008597803302109241, 0.03909200429916382, 0.040000274777412415, 0.01785299740731716, 0.045346371829509735, 0.016023384407162666, 0.021251849830150604, -0.053112778812646866, -0.032897207885980606, -0.03432166576385498, -0.008364980109035969, 0.0011106660822406411, -0.08022677898406982, -0.03908680006861687, 0.03924486041069031, 0.0519784614443779, -0.03715600445866585, 0.07707131654024124, -0.058022890239953995, 0.061521515250205994, 0.03956631198525429, 0.02064601145684719, 0.03548923134803772, -0.019483089447021484, -0.005242515821009874, -0.06754717230796814, -0.04676011949777603, 0.002452194457873702, 0.035451337695121765, -0.014974799938499928, -0.0035167948808521032, -0.011935091577470303, -0.011461994610726833, 0.006976400036364794, 0.061788879334926605, -0.008522260934114456, -0.1217668429017067, -0.0008551978971809149, -0.06039269268512726, 0.06607692688703537, -0.04255151003599167, 0.0531591922044754, 0.15101055800914764, -0.03994785621762276, 0.03873889520764351, 0.1140487790107727, -0.08647774904966354, 0.05528208985924721, 0.08297891914844513, 0.05725356936454773, 0.024182308465242386, 0.03509514033794403, 0.04183776676654816, 0.006626657210290432, -0.054956234991550446, 0.01496552862226963, -0.016984879970550537, -0.07231421023607254, 0.08161763101816177, -0.002332054078578949, -0.01523931510746479, -0.02412424050271511, -0.037469565868377686, 0.014493148773908615, -0.08069819211959839, -0.09077154844999313, 0.08703125268220901, 0.009196008555591106, 0.032253749668598175, 0.04222991317510605, -0.10384733974933624, 0.030649445950984955, -0.03041158616542816, 0.0650668740272522, 0.005627420265227556, 0.04996567592024803, 0.08081994950771332, 0.054218899458646774, 0.010075300931930542, 0.032795075327157974, 0.029502514749765396, -0.009944865480065346, -0.020864175632596016, -0.023114152252674103, 0.020313432440161705, 0.07972989976406097, -0.043447479605674744, -0.006660280283540487, -0.013190765865147114, 0.03649231046438217, -0.011147101409733295, 0.07023240625858307, 0.0216981191188097, -0.08132045716047287, -5.602546125150663e-34, -0.013946847058832645, 0.047878462821245193, -0.0002321156789548695, 0.03484822064638138, 0.06115055829286575, -0.06015733256936073, 0.05862152576446533, -0.05446571484208107, -0.08009976893663406, -0.04208887368440628, -0.03514498472213745, 0.07310864329338074, 0.02757754735648632, 0.11818554252386093, -0.00345857092179358, -0.08895814418792725, -0.02004934847354889, -0.04499908164143562, 0.024162909016013145, 0.00014011336315888911, 0.011022914201021194, -0.058812133967876434, 0.017563361674547195, 0.040702205151319504, 0.016508257016539574, -0.019858652725815773, -0.08301111310720444, 0.07219696044921875, 0.08915531635284424, 0.0026557117234915495, -0.015319464728236198, 0.05745811387896538, 0.026638519018888474, -0.10039620846509933, -0.025932742282748222, -0.030486494302749634, 0.0565108098089695, -0.056005336344242096, -0.0734492838382721, -0.08859594911336899, -0.07580511271953583, 0.012399092316627502, 0.09250924736261368, -0.0321219228208065, 0.06826776266098022, -0.043348319828510284, -0.02194783091545105, -0.004678576253354549, -0.025585010647773743, 0.017118822783231735, -0.005846643354743719, -0.022813014686107635, -0.12264593690633774, -0.016819588840007782, -0.12001843750476837, -0.01639130897819996, -0.07275859266519547, 0.017306726425886154, 0.0037253962364047766, -0.030892645940184593, 0.021653924137353897, -0.0857396125793457, -0.045788343995809555, 0.0015142764896154404, -0.03254294767975807, -0.01280883140861988, 0.08439180999994278, -0.011463852599263191, 0.11099353432655334, -0.0240608062595129, -0.020077789202332497, 0.08920799940824509, 0.02861952781677246, -0.016728514805436134, -0.04030982777476311, -0.0624423548579216, 0.0504964217543602, 0.07229287922382355, 0.052911967039108276, 0.12874911725521088, 0.006839782930910587, -0.04108560085296631, -0.030224820598959923, -0.04208828881382942, 0.055421132594347, 0.005062614101916552, 0.01398023497313261, 0.028470968827605247, -0.0015400007832795382, -0.06754414737224579, -0.029921403154730797, -0.026016943156719208, 0.007736649829894304, 0.014973892830312252, 0.06109423562884331, -2.0013652739703407e-33, 0.11012884974479675, 0.0031475264113396406, 0.10075942426919937, -0.051812201738357544, 0.07294953614473343, 0.0181893240660429, 0.008498658426105976, -0.13505299389362335, 0.04658564552664757, 0.028903547674417496, 0.031355120241642, 0.004701843485236168, 0.06090964004397392, -0.01719123311340809, -0.03162621706724167, -0.007005816791206598, -0.027754729613661766, 0.0022417446598410606, 0.007898659445345402, -0.03639800846576691, 0.033511191606521606, 0.09120413661003113, -0.007558578625321388, 0.0870889350771904, 0.06605472415685654, -0.05295220762491226, -0.049904048442840576, -0.039609145373106, -0.016307257115840912, 0.06463517248630524, 0.047132596373558044, 0.037496451288461685, -0.010665387846529484, -0.008178956806659698, -0.11966340243816376, 0.008159586228430271, -0.00948940310627222, -0.09170958399772644, -0.04625476524233818, -0.033958397805690765, 0.0837399810552597, -0.03445001691579819, -0.037739790976047516, 0.009435098618268967, -0.0703778937458992, 0.032774779945611954, 0.017365269362926483, -0.02489892952144146, -0.0073173800483345985, 0.04442460834980011, -0.005612930282950401, 0.015812795609235764, 0.021705936640501022, 0.04272756353020668, 0.03884492814540863, 0.03671007603406906, 0.02240722067654133, -0.0004376464057713747, -0.0328218936920166, 0.0027512412052601576, 0.004873757250607014, 0.05543024092912674, -0.12552745640277863, 0.0192900188267231, 0.04068027809262276, -0.10666199028491974, -0.08559256047010422, -0.013601615093648434, 0.02315666526556015, 0.010639534331858158, -0.0352170355618, -0.014503970742225647, 0.060455601662397385, -0.07182633876800537, -0.04103025794029236, -0.06687746942043304, 0.019953614100813866, -0.02444840781390667, -0.09019678831100464, -0.008255893364548683, 0.0325305201113224, -0.07974043488502502, 0.004856891930103302, 0.016125133261084557, -0.0006500316085293889, -0.008578725159168243, 0.053897108882665634, -0.015035321936011314, -0.05180931091308594, 0.11616577953100204, -0.06194349005818367, -0.03013564832508564, 0.03018520027399063, -0.009232799522578716, 0.002778197405859828, -3.999808129151461e-8, 0.09615882486104965, 0.03937404975295067, -0.062227487564086914, 0.031275905668735504, 0.005531329661607742, -0.0035336483269929886, -0.12601955235004425, 0.02987278252840042, -0.020687010139226913, 0.007105531170964241, 0.09097164124250412, 0.05775810033082962, -0.12085232883691788, -0.05253452807664871, -0.013889997266232967, -0.07563979178667068, -0.03610513359308243, 0.02848406508564949, -0.030750740319490433, -0.035893891006708145, -0.025959789752960205, -0.0025886131916195154, -0.07358293980360031, -0.006781556643545628, -0.0034321965649724007, -0.05163668841123581, -0.010010800324380398, 0.0044170524924993515, -0.04348784312605858, -0.07592491805553436, 0.015924818813800812, -0.017001163214445114, -0.05916814133524895, 0.05657699704170227, 0.0012133951531723142, -0.022562434896826744, -0.056798309087753296, 0.012096286751329899, 0.07053365558385849, 0.03419572114944458, 0.024054743349552155, 0.09947369247674942, -0.008697516284883022, -0.03331846743822098, -0.0506996251642704, 0.0812772661447525, -0.08967051655054092, -0.0060131545178592205, 0.0290057472884655, -0.058763034641742706, 0.0008556288667023182, 0.0022656077053397894, -0.005390674341470003, -0.025434687733650208, 0.00790769699960947, 0.03839847818017006, -0.04655861109495163, 0.021602537482976913, 0.0705808624625206, -0.009585739113390446, 0.00044122550752945244, -0.06782303005456924, 0.010445494204759598, -0.058260634541511536 ]

{ "pdf_file": "KDJPDOF5V7PZBQSCATREA7E7S57NWM4E.pdf", "text": "Grant to Aid Youth Group\n \n \nGrant to Aid Youth Group\n \nThe Daily Herald Reports\n \nDes Plaines Healthy Community Partnership Foundation today announced a $93,000\nDrug-Free Communities matching grant was earned to support the work of the Maine\nCommunity Youth Assistance Foundation of Maine Township. \n \nThe grant was one of 226 new grants totaling $21.9 million awarded today to community\nanti-drug coalitions across the country. \n \nThese coalitions are comprised of a diverse cross-section of parents, youth, teachers, religious\nand fraternal organizations, health care and business professionals, law enforcement, the\nmedia, and community leaders. \n \nThey work to prevent and reduce drug, alcohol, and tobacco use among youth. The Office of\nNational Drug Control Policy administers the community anti-drug program in conjunction with\nthe Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. \n \nThe Des Plaines Healthy Community Partnership Foundation is the fiscal agent for the Maine\nCommunity Youth Assistance Foundation The $93,000 award will assist the foundation to\nachieve its two goals of strengthening coalition effectiveness and reducing substance abuse\namong youth by implementing the following strategies: \n \n. Develop a multiyear risk prevention community action plan \n \n 1 / 2 Grant to Aid Youth Group\n. Develop effective community responses to youth alcohol, tobacco and drug use. \n \n. Strengthening coalition effectiveness by increasing the number of community sectors\nrepresented on the coalition and supporting existing partner staff to institute and or continue\nprevention/intervention programming. \n \nThe foundation partnered with other community organizations whose focus is on healthy, safe\nand drug-free youth. Grant dollars will support East Maine School District 63's TLC after school\nprogram and Maine Township High School District 207's alternatives to suspension program. \n \nU.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky took an active role in supporting the foundation's grant application\nto bring these resources to Maine Township.\n \n \n 2 / 2" }

[ -0.06573574244976044, 0.024773549288511276, 0.02611067332327366, 0.03566402941942215, 0.041087325662374496, -0.052892621606588364, -0.04917970672249794, 0.006455962546169758, 0.02218042127788067, -0.02530384063720703, -0.06974351406097412, -0.05234890803694725, -0.03405537083745003, -0.0022628926672041416, -0.03967364877462387, -0.09011951833963394, -0.004529021214693785, 0.04645339772105217, 0.005812292452901602, 0.09993509203195572, 0.0425383485853672, 0.08955305814743042, -0.04554448276758194, -0.004741612356156111, 0.05140211433172226, 0.021928275004029274, -0.03730807080864906, 0.03408827632665634, -0.00435080099850893, -0.01976972259581089, -0.06183607131242752, -0.009954605251550674, 0.057269949465990067, 0.04077339917421341, 0.133790984749794, -0.021196240559220314, -0.009534521959722042, 0.09495324641466141, 0.06149782985448837, -0.029420815408229828, -0.0005577482515946031, -0.11308199167251587, 0.06023002043366432, 0.010423434898257256, -0.03399674594402313, 0.049720533192157745, 0.0400765985250473, -0.00028086817474104464, -0.007846196182072163, 0.09087652713060379, 0.0058770994655787945, -0.09494699537754059, -0.040547020733356476, 0.04990736022591591, -0.003817185992375016, 0.034930139780044556, 0.050517939031124115, -0.0007965703844092786, 0.009592276997864246, -0.032720908522605896, 0.07978004217147827, -0.07495307922363281, -0.024769902229309082, 0.03720797598361969, 0.06500200927257538, 0.09492321312427521, -0.009836186654865742, -0.03330523893237114, 0.043764498084783554, -0.08835053443908691, 0.08609597384929657, 0.01613304205238819, 0.030125360935926437, 0.016410835087299347, -0.006541678681969643, 0.11323179304599762, -0.03476714342832565, 0.09300294518470764, 0.010145194828510284, -0.08054998517036438, 0.03634687885642052, 0.03707946464419365, -0.02477627992630005, -0.11927676945924759, -0.03634364902973175, -0.0027305218391120434, 0.048837147653102875, 0.011972940526902676, 0.04316592589020729, -0.0543399341404438, -0.007788606453686953, -0.005573119968175888, 0.1047784686088562, 0.021619517356157303, -0.0596386194229126, -0.021144816651940346, -0.009929000400006771, 0.07385769486427307, 0.05601082742214203, -0.041753318160772324, 0.06504737585783005, 0.09036220610141754, -0.17234086990356445, -0.01794472709298134, 0.000840933935251087, 0.016575468704104424, 0.002085434040054679, 0.03897963464260101, 0.0052465940825641155, 0.01655065268278122, 0.024736864492297173, 0.06591946631669998, -0.03196107968688011, -0.07080218940973282, -0.07406546920537949, 0.014824903570115566, -0.03283177316188812, -0.020147889852523804, 0.001536163385026157, -0.0021553903352469206, -0.023883504793047905, -0.01715269312262535, -0.04457448422908783, -0.053696781396865845, 0.022757763043045998, 0.05407923087477684, -0.00025971955619752407, -3.837918169911172e-35, -0.11793474853038788, 0.06184061989188194, 0.02465301938354969, 0.01824295148253441, 0.026322176679968834, 0.027337972074747086, 0.02921939082443714, -0.03201340138912201, 0.016886157914996147, 0.0139730554074049, 0.01573248580098152, 0.06511647254228592, 0.0739196240901947, -0.030649064108729362, -0.09334966540336609, -0.06970825791358948, 0.04059181362390518, -0.08145131915807724, 0.03382658585906029, -0.05865878239274025, -0.017954664304852486, 0.10707061737775803, 0.001245333580300212, 0.005582529120147228, -0.01601405441761017, -0.003220590762794018, -0.034468911588191986, -0.04330482706427574, -0.03394461050629616, 0.011204462498426437, 0.02901790477335453, -0.012192297726869583, 0.046788234263658524, 0.027522370219230652, 0.056753892451524734, -0.018725017085671425, 0.05337764322757721, -0.028811367228627205, -0.08330454677343369, -0.03265190124511719, 0.03670957311987877, 0.02909100614488125, -0.08708944916725159, 0.013438619673252106, -0.008492106571793556, -0.02237917110323906, 0.0030437326058745384, 0.04415542259812355, 0.054153166711330414, -0.03379193693399429, 0.04518396034836769, 0.062001265585422516, 0.004674984607845545, 0.007480432279407978, 0.008709580637514591, -0.05890854075551033, -0.07140599936246872, -0.07331093400716782, -0.00890578143298626, -0.038506753742694855, 0.0028294858057051897, 0.11651447415351868, -0.014454890973865986, 0.07051721960306168, -0.021840715780854225, 0.012448242865502834, 0.017531946301460266, 0.0036922015715390444, -0.030156593769788742, -0.022650042548775673, 0.04380340874195099, -0.0242146085947752, 0.03938835859298706, 0.027557892724871635, 0.04864080250263214, -0.05909281596541405, -0.008170460350811481, 0.005262752994894981, -0.05814564973115921, -0.04261079430580139, 0.006404641084372997, 0.0225004181265831, 0.044546887278556824, -0.014203759841620922, -0.04417015612125397, -0.10441559553146362, -0.016141464933753014, 0.0646388828754425, 0.013339274562895298, 0.015439375303685665, -0.03083946742117405, 0.0160535778850317, 0.004120382480323315, 0.10960289090871811, 0.002739789430052042, -1.1933009780208335e-33, 0.02643042616546154, -0.04797562211751938, -0.09791933000087738, -0.02641962096095085, -0.10399210453033447, -0.06095845252275467, 0.02469044178724289, -0.04821326211094856, 0.016405006870627403, -0.11827658861875534, 0.04833701252937317, -0.018057117238640785, 0.010724362917244434, 0.024310402572155, -0.0019212249899283051, 0.008354710415005684, -0.05473603308200836, -0.02712414599955082, -0.015703212469816208, 0.044144757091999054, -0.01553176250308752, -0.03750487416982651, -0.14868547022342682, 0.039009712636470795, -0.06012570858001709, 0.023524757474660873, 0.0652323067188263, 0.018549839034676552, 0.09018086642026901, -0.006379497703164816, -0.05820881202816963, 0.12238223850727081, -0.03989609703421593, 0.12893836200237274, -0.07078662514686584, -0.02314426191151142, 0.08871566504240036, -0.03920963406562805, -0.02026236616075039, 0.007913689129054546, -0.03481687977910042, 0.061649397015571594, 0.0008719451725482941, 0.014596415683627129, -0.005568691994994879, -0.05265168845653534, 0.060651328414678574, -0.06749371439218521, -0.07844004780054092, 0.06404822319746017, 0.026901686564087868, -0.08711084723472595, -0.024144070222973824, -0.012115737423300743, 0.05839706212282181, 0.06597215682268143, -0.024682171642780304, 0.049353595823049545, -0.03376445919275284, 0.0028577817138284445, 0.12794896960258484, 0.11824130266904831, 0.007882282137870789, -0.03995762765407562, 0.04483385756611824, 0.015705043449997902, -0.10702202469110489, -0.056171126663684845, 0.059843845665454865, -0.010039529763162136, -0.008211402222514153, -0.02349061705172062, -0.11838407814502716, -0.08163609355688095, -0.013915703631937504, 0.015620291233062744, 0.07808500528335571, -0.06670158356428146, -0.12482722848653793, -0.020217668265104294, 0.003799969330430031, 0.04317617416381836, 0.02332398109138012, 0.037787776440382004, 0.015322389081120491, 0.08865579962730408, 0.05014179274439812, -0.04830964654684067, -0.0267039705067873, 0.05321286991238594, -0.045365773141384125, -0.03868585452437401, -0.010529096238315105, 0.045053284615278244, -0.01071814727038145, -4.704124734189463e-8, 0.01678190752863884, 0.025757499039173126, -0.016651010140776634, 0.03619296848773956, 0.06622902303934097, 0.0027596449945122004, 0.023011108860373497, 0.011556630954146385, -0.009733637794852257, -0.006161917466670275, 0.06342173367738724, -0.0620240643620491, 0.027658384293317795, -0.017584798857569695, -0.015652010217308998, -0.021457085385918617, -0.0706447958946228, 0.01880069635808468, -0.029451262205839157, 0.018462859094142914, -0.09562981128692627, 0.03870372101664543, -0.058037206530570984, -0.02626124583184719, 0.0026868856512010098, -0.02933073230087757, 0.06058201193809509, 0.02589944377541542, -0.013053685426712036, 0.007958930917084217, -0.010495052672922611, 0.004678961355239153, 0.07286682724952698, 0.03773805871605873, -0.00980508141219616, -0.04153651371598244, -0.01872767135500908, 0.0231129489839077, 0.054899219423532486, -0.0011694090208038688, -0.011956136673688889, 0.08396206796169281, -0.06860541552305222, 0.018440967425704002, -0.050749436020851135, -0.05284899100661278, -0.09192905575037003, -0.027418117970228195, 0.09194846451282501, 0.0004937546327710152, -0.0012638414045795798, -0.04778003320097923, -0.022761838510632515, 0.007744055241346359, 0.10633008182048798, 0.03202763944864273, -0.06756625324487686, 0.03339282050728798, -0.002354341559112072, 0.01261068508028984, -0.03895941749215126, -0.05005287006497383, -0.023708734661340714, -0.04266318678855896 ]

{ "pdf_file": "SW6G4QILYS7QYXXVHMGTCXFHYU2QHV6Z.pdf", "text": "68267 Federal Register /Vol. 63, No. 237 /Thursday, December 10, 1998 /Notices\nDEPARTMENT OF ENERGY\nFederal Energy Regulatory\nCommission\n[Docket Nos. CP98±107±000 and CP98±109±\n000]\nContinental Natural Gas, Inc.; Notice of\nCorporate Name Change\nDecember 4, 1998.\nTake notice that on December 2, 1998,\nContinental Natural Gas, Inc.\n(Continental), tendered for filing in the\nabove-docketed proceedings a notice\nconcerning a change in its corporate\nname.\nContinental informs the Commission\nthat effective October 16, 1998, the\nname of Continental Natural Gas, Inc.\nhas been changed to CMS Continental\nNatural Gas, Inc. Continental requests\nthat the Commission modify its records\nin the above-docketed proceedings,\nincluding the certificates granted to\nContinental to reflect the new name.\nContinental states that its corporate\nname change is a change in name only\nand does not reflect any substantive\nchange in operation.\nAny person desiring to be heard or to\nprotest said filing should file a motion\nto intervene or a protest with the\nFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,\n888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC\n20426, in accordance with Sections\n385.211 and 385.214 of the\nCommission's Rules and Regulations.\nAll such motions must be filed on or\nbefore December 21, 1998, as provided\nin Section 154.210 of the Commission's\nregulations. Protests will be considered\nby the Commission in determining the\nappropriate action to be taken, but will\nnot serve to make protestants parties to\nthe proceedings. Any person wishing to\nbecome a party must file a motion to\nintervene. Copies of the filing are on file\nwith the Commission and are available\nfor public inspection in the Public\nReference Room.\nDavid P. Boergers,\nSecretary.\n[FR Doc. 98±32777 Filed 12±9±98; 8:45 am]\nBILLING CODE 6717±01±M\nDEPARTMENT OF ENERGY\nFederal Energy Regulatory\nCommission\n[Docket No. TM99±1±2±000]\nEast Tennessee Natural Gas Company;\nNotice of Tariff Filing\nDecember 4, 1998.\nTake notice that on December 1, 1998,\nEast Tennessee Natural Gas Company(East Tennessee), tendered for filing as\npart of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second\nRevised Volume No. 1, Fifteenth\nRevised Sheet No. 4, with an effective\ndate of January 1, 1999.\nEast Tennessee states that it is\nsubmitting the revised tariff sheet\npursuant to Section 33 of the General\nTerms and Conditions of its Tariff, the\nMarch 10, 1998 Stipulation and\nAgreement filed in Docket No. RP97±\n149, et al., and approved by the\nCommission on April 29, 1998, and the\nCommission's ``Order Approving the\nGas Research Institute's 1999 Research,\nDevelopment and Demonstration\nProgram and 1999±2003 Five-Year\nPlan'' issued in Docket No. RP98±235.\nSee Gas Research Institute, 83 FERC\n61,093 (1998); Gas Research Institute, 84\nFERC 61,326 (1998). East Tennessee\nfurther states that tariff sheet revises the\nGas Research Institute surcharges for\n1999.\nAny person desiring to be heard or to\nprotest said filing should file a motion\nto intervene or a protest with the\nFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,\n888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.\n20426, in accordance with Sections\n385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's\nRules and Regulations. All such motions\nor protests must be filed in accordance\nwith Section 154.210 of the\nCommission's Regulations. Protests will\nbe considered by the Commission in\ndetermining the appropriate action to be\ntaken, but will not serve to make\nprotestants parties to the proceedings.\nAny person wishing to become a party\nmust file a motion to intervene. Copies\nof this filing are on file with the\nCommission and are available for public\ninspection in the Public Reference\nRoom.\nDavid P. Boergers,\nSecretary.\n[FR Doc. 98±32834 Filed 12±9±98; 8:45 am]\nBILLING CODE 6717±01±M\nDEPARTMENT OF ENERGY\nFederal Energy Regulatory\nCommission\n[Docket No. TM99±3±23±000]\nEastern Shore Natural Gas Company;\nNotice of Proposed Changes in FERC\nGas Tariff\nDecember 4, 1998.\nTake notice that on December 1, 1998,\nEastern Shore Natural Gas Company\n(ESNG) tendered for filing as part of its\nFERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume\nNo. 1, certain revised tariff sheets in the\nabove captioned docket bear a proposed\neffective date of November 1, 1998.ESNG states that the purpose of this\ninstant filing is to track rate changes\nattributable to storage services\npurchased from Transcontinental Gas\nPipe Line Corporation (Transco) under\nits Rate Schedules GSS and LSS, the\ncosts of which comprise the rates and\ncharges payable under ESNG's Rate\nSchedules GSS and LSS. This tracking\nfiling is being made pursuant to Section\n3 of ESNG's Rate Schedules GSS and\nLSS, respectively.\nESNG states that copies of the filing\nhave been served upon its jurisdictional\ncustomers and interested State\nCommissions.\nAny person desiring to be heard or to\nprotest said filing should file a motion\nto intervene or a protest with the\nFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,\n888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC\n20426, in accordance with Sections\n385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's\nRules and Regulations. All such motions\nor protests must be filed in accordance\nwith Section 154.210 of the\nCommission's Regulations. Protests will\nbe considered by the Commission in\ndetermining the appropriate action to be\ntaken, but will not serve to make\nprotestants parties to the proceedings.\nAny person wishing to become a party\nmust file a motion to intervene. Copies\nof this filing are on file with the\nCommission and are available for public\ninspection in the Public Reference\nRoom.\nDavid P. Boergers,\nSecretary.\n[FR Doc. 98±32844 Filed 12±9±98; 8:45 am]\nBILLING CODE 6717±01±M\nDEPARTMENT OF ENERGY\nFederal Energy Regulatory\nCommission\n[Docket No. RP99±168±000]\nEl Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice\nof Proposed Changes in FERC Gas\nTariff\nDecember 4, 1998.\nTake notice that on December 1, 1998,\nEl Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso)\ntendered for filing as part of its FERC\nGas Tariff, the following tariff sheets to\nbecome effective January 1, 1999:\nSecond Revised Volume No. 1±A\nFifteenth Revised Sheet No. 20\nNinth Revised Sheet No. 22\nFifteenth Revised Sheet No. 23\nNineteenth Revised Sheet No. 24\nFifteenth Revised Sheet No. 26\nFifteenth Revised Sheet No. 27\nThird Revised Volume No. 2\nForth-Fourth Revised Sheet No. 1±D.2" }

[ -0.09856795519590378, 0.06846611201763153, 0.031176069751381874, 0.02717290259897709, 0.02639339305460453, 0.0709005817770958, 0.009098665788769722, -0.007260048761963844, -0.016825800761580467, 0.06027493253350258, 0.1113758236169815, -0.004033922683447599, 0.009194964542984962, -0.0032705250196158886, 0.0026983299758285284, 0.0889732763171196, 0.07269075512886047, 0.018714843317866325, -0.05600690096616745, 0.05941583216190338, 0.028948061168193817, -0.022569753229618073, -0.030901135876774788, 0.06798098236322403, -0.06256643682718277, -0.034742988646030426, -0.003526730462908745, 0.021258486434817314, -0.04279624670743942, -0.021789640188217163, -0.09877291321754456, 0.1468587964773178, -0.022870540618896484, 0.050162866711616516, -0.020932365208864212, 0.006307282019406557, 0.143873393535614, -0.06827807426452637, 0.02014612965285778, -0.015462242066860199, -0.016174055635929108, -0.01691489666700363, 0.0003505168133415282, 0.017744358628988266, 0.021503375843167305, 0.04203219339251518, 0.05660410597920418, 0.06490129977464676, -0.12274745106697083, -0.01447638776153326, -0.027620356529951096, -0.012358525767922401, 0.020779654383659363, 0.03570210561156273, -0.010569914244115353, -0.0047259945422410965, 0.044898856431245804, 0.002961128018796444, -0.007521944120526314, 0.036864567548036575, 0.01393058244138956, -0.0741351917386055, -0.002367989858612418, 0.05441386252641678, -0.02907971665263176, -0.016436932608485222, -0.015588520094752312, -0.07224555313587189, -0.011623387224972248, -0.01155239250510931, 0.06880819797515869, -0.038472410291433334, 0.008697057142853737, 0.11387301236391068, -0.013072448782622814, 0.045433077961206436, 0.03887534886598587, 0.070551298558712, 0.03640201315283775, -0.10995128005743027, -0.016684075817465782, -0.03711917996406555, -0.06309786438941956, -0.044410984963178635, -0.029918843880295753, -0.10021283477544785, 0.0019174603512510657, 0.003936680033802986, 0.048778604716062546, 0.018483225256204605, 0.07653310149908066, -0.0444527268409729, 0.019500769674777985, -0.020015524700284004, 0.027991116046905518, -0.055450234562158585, -0.02296726033091545, 0.03668447583913803, 0.05113692954182625, 0.008254790678620338, 0.058973997831344604, 0.048285432159900665, -0.06128465756773949, 0.03310306370258331, -0.06434255093336105, -0.09405893087387085, -0.0165118295699358, 0.0029708221554756165, -0.08089578151702881, 0.024387134239077568, 0.0035770966205745935, -0.028714099898934364, 0.017381489276885986, -0.04327959939837456, 0.003281055949628353, -0.02896866388618946, -0.00913678016513586, 0.05487256124615669, 0.046574193984270096, -0.04120740294456482, 0.040126170963048935, 0.07188190519809723, -0.15974023938179016, 0.006522137671709061, -0.02756704017519951, 0.019810974597930908, -0.05770869925618172, -4.9292111142206525e-33, 0.0363578163087368, 0.020844167098402977, 0.00241111870855093, -0.0310225710272789, 0.0536155104637146, -0.03503935784101486, 0.01167767308652401, 0.007431688718497753, 0.07107763737440109, -0.03415757790207863, -0.06428883969783783, -0.0505412295460701, 0.0008541608112864196, -0.07245159149169922, -0.059511568397283554, 0.013683476485311985, -0.024057218804955482, 0.0028635277412831783, -0.06544428318738937, 0.029532836750149727, 0.09105674177408218, -0.036685433238744736, 0.014506449922919273, 0.07211542874574661, -0.020929601043462753, 0.004929360002279282, 0.016499081626534462, -0.07397764176130295, -0.031310100108385086, 0.04086676985025406, 0.05630827322602272, -0.011181974783539772, 0.05009995028376579, 0.11793247610330582, -0.021019240841269493, -0.05738746374845505, 0.05606936290860176, -0.02658981829881668, 0.013082342222332954, -0.04338504374027252, -0.06387881934642792, 0.05466334894299507, 0.01061580516397953, 0.024858156219124794, -0.01316771749407053, -0.03653886914253235, -0.01306129153817892, 0.0665011927485466, 0.06164461746811867, 0.09178638458251953, 0.01759401336312294, 0.0006939609302207828, 0.06639987230300903, -0.017330415546894073, -0.0265289805829525, -0.005775781348347664, -0.08000437915325165, -0.02461378090083599, 0.034892838448286057, 0.0020212181843817234, -0.03649580106139183, 0.1308780312538147, -0.05060689151287079, -0.051107920706272125, -0.04995076730847359, -0.06804971396923065, 0.015896474942564964, 0.004095201380550861, -0.02139453962445259, -0.09371119737625122, 0.0379774235188961, 0.005116496700793505, -0.004387721419334412, 0.03926299139857292, -0.03689340502023697, -0.02848454937338829, 0.05380671098828316, 0.026039201766252518, 0.004280261229723692, -0.12474988400936127, -0.0651308074593544, 0.009854157455265522, 0.038338880985975266, -0.00013929941633250564, -0.035404711961746216, -0.04411938413977623, 0.06017378345131874, 0.007565217558294535, 0.026270605623722076, 0.06280489265918732, 0.0008859363733790815, -0.0191176924854517, -0.027307000011205673, 0.07989419251680374, 0.0647396594285965, 9.733143734331427e-34, 0.004205590579658747, -0.058970775455236435, -0.06177130714058876, -0.03228529915213585, 0.01608896255493164, -0.04297725483775139, -0.06443148851394653, -0.00821312703192234, 0.04332812502980232, -0.0554732121527195, -0.06318777799606323, -0.0832437202334404, 0.008692046627402306, 0.015998831018805504, -0.038879528641700745, -0.017886070534586906, 0.04836475849151611, 0.018772372975945473, -0.022234678268432617, 0.05327465757727623, 0.07636822015047073, 0.04592344909906387, -0.02993553690612316, -0.04565408080816269, -0.025275325402617455, 0.0029709278605878353, 0.09899839013814926, -0.024938886985182762, 0.04679761081933975, 0.04169690981507301, 0.0017566262977197766, -0.045814771205186844, -0.05363566428422928, 0.06771758198738098, 0.03701639175415039, -0.06951893866062164, 0.06408241391181946, 0.01681891269981861, -0.015517589636147022, 0.006224270910024643, 0.04411228001117706, 0.028302069753408432, 0.01170756109058857, 0.06996535509824753, -0.02701137587428093, -0.02448817528784275, 0.003438712330535054, -0.059369511902332306, -0.020460858941078186, -0.024341987445950508, -0.05848202481865883, 0.013222240842878819, 0.0637957975268364, 0.032034579664468765, -0.03165791928768158, -0.05273255705833435, -0.034990012645721436, -0.07465486973524094, -0.0979568287730217, -0.01067872904241085, 0.06002673879265785, 0.07726365327835083, -0.037024933844804764, -0.09936057776212692, 0.08439202606678009, -0.039876218885183334, -0.04938259348273277, -0.08421065658330917, 0.06378264725208282, -0.050443556159734726, 0.02485174871981144, -0.13340817391872406, -0.053824394941329956, -0.08554673939943314, 0.0693504810333252, -0.009188574738800526, -0.032388363033533096, 0.020785659551620483, -0.1009741872549057, 0.03918515890836716, -0.006585477851331234, -0.046573806554079056, -0.008288702927529812, 0.08777107298374176, 0.00039490347262471914, 0.07798828184604645, 0.02608470804989338, 0.0891646072268486, 0.03216313198208809, 0.07984833419322968, -0.02272096276283264, 0.03395136073231697, 0.00676063122227788, 0.030091704800724983, 0.009226608090102673, -5.5833371703783996e-8, 0.011210121214389801, -0.08183737844228745, 0.031469929963350296, 0.006285547744482756, 0.07754071801900864, 0.04104287177324295, -0.02331520989537239, 0.04560302570462227, -0.007882168516516685, 0.05423230677843094, 0.028996849432587624, 0.04198500141501427, -0.005622207187116146, -0.09018347412347794, -0.05860379710793495, -0.058024030178785324, -0.017527986317873, 0.010292574763298035, -0.07379797846078873, -0.0073400032706558704, -0.09649937599897385, 0.02910456247627735, -0.03216949850320816, -0.021081503480672836, -0.005581180099397898, 0.016903318464756012, -0.05107133090496063, -0.06625062972307205, -0.02989770844578743, 0.03076520934700966, -0.07399819046258926, 0.057576537132263184, -0.03980428725481033, -0.07682309299707413, -0.12666253745555878, -0.0371091291308403, 0.054974447935819626, 0.06953918188810349, 0.04528803005814552, -0.08322116732597351, -0.0737825483083725, -0.004625318571925163, 0.0212564580142498, 0.04431569203734398, 0.08579537272453308, -0.08474534749984741, -0.08232295513153076, -0.05516701564192772, -0.010351958684623241, 0.0696621984243393, -0.02192108705639839, -0.08963775634765625, -0.044853854924440384, 0.015932105481624603, -0.05901142582297325, 0.034294139593839645, 0.04919110983610153, -0.0492657907307148, -0.010061527602374554, 0.039029739797115326, 0.018804406747221947, 0.007878436706960201, 0.0771477073431015, 0.04154890030622482 ]

{ "pdf_file": "BNAB3PKSEPVY6LVEMD6PZQXWXMDDTQ7U.pdf", "text": "8 OCAHO 1003\n UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER\n____________________________________\n)\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )\nComplainant, )8 U.S.C. § 1324a Proceeding\n)\nv. )OCAHO Case No. 97A00116\n)\nSPRING & SOON FASHION INC., )Judge Robert L. Barton, Jr.\nd/b/a Y PLUS S CORPORATION, )\nd/b/a Y PRUS S CORPORATION, )\nRespondents. )\n____________________________________)\nORDER GRANTING IN PART COMPLAINANT’S MOTION \nFOR SUMMARY DECISION, DENYING COMPLAINANT’S\nMOTION TO COMPEL, AND GRANTING COMPLAINANT’S\nMOTION TO SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL\n(July 8, 1998)\nI.INTRODUCTION\nThis case centers around Complainant’s allegations that Respondent Spring & Soon Fashion\nInc. (Spring & Soon) violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) by hiring employees\nknowing they were unauthorized to work in the United States and by failing to comply with the\nemployment eligibility verification requirements of the INA. Complainant also seeks to hold\nRespondent Y Plus Corporation d/b/a Y Prus Corporation (Y Plus) responsible for any violations\nactually committed by Spring & Soon. The main issues in this Order are: \n(1) whether Complainant has demonstrated that there are no genuine issues of\nmaterial fact in this case; and\n(2) whether Complainant has demonstrated that it is entitled to judgment as a matter\nof law against Spring & Soon and/or Y Plus. 8 OCAHO 1003 2\n1 Complainant has entitled its filing a “Motion for Summary Judgment.” The OCAHO\nRules of Practice and Procedure provide for motions for summary decision, see 28 C.F.R.\n§ 68.38 (1997), which are similar to motions for summary judgment under Federal Rule of\nCivil Procedure 56. I will treat Complainant’s Motion as a motion for summary decision, and\nI will refer to it as such. \n2 The following abbreviations will be used throughout this Order:\nShofi Decl. Declaration of INS Agent John Shofi, attached to Complainant’s\nMotion to Amend Complaint\nCompl. Original Complaint\nAmended Compl. Amended Complaint\nC. Mot. Default Complainant’s Motion for Default Judgment\nAns. Answer\nAns. to Amended Compl. Answer to Amended Complaint\nC. Mot. SD Complainant’s Motion for Summary Decision\nC. Mot. Compel Complainant’s Motion to Compel Response to Request for\nProduction of Documents and Answer to Interrogatories\nSCO Show Cause Order\nR. Response SCO Respondents’ Response to Show Cause Order\nC. Request Admiss. Complainant’s Request for Admissions, attached to Complainant’s\nMotion for Summary DecisionThis Order disposes of all outstanding motions. For the reasons discussed in detail below, I find that\nComplainant has demonstrated that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that it is entitled\nto judgment as a matter of law as to the liability of both Spring & Soon and Y Plus. However, I find\nthat Complainant has not demonstrated that there are no genuine issues of material fact with respect\nto the amount of penalty this case warrants. As a result, I \n(1) GRANT Complainant’s Motion for Summary Decision1 as to liability for both\nSpring & Soon and Y Plus; and\n(2) DENY Complainant’s Motion for Summary Decision as to the appropriate civil\nmoney penalty to assess. \nII.BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY\nOn September 27, 1996, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS or Complainant)\nserved a Notice of Intent to Fine (NIF) relating to Respondent Spring & Soon Fashion Inc. on\nMrs. Young S. Sung at the business premises of Y Plus S Corporation, d/b/a Y Prus S Corporation.\nShofi Decl.2 ¶ 5. Mrs. Sung’s husband, Mr. Chang S. Sung, is listed as Spring & Soon’s 8 OCAHO 1003 3\n3 According to the official case file, no other amended complaint had been filed. \nTherefore, this was not the second amended complaint but, rather, the first amendment. Thus,\nit will be referred to as the amended complaint. incorporator on Spring & Soon’s certificate of incorporation, see C. Request Admiss. Ex. E, and as\nSpring & Soon’s president on its I-9 forms, see id. Ex. A, but Mrs. Sung allegedly identified herself\nas Spring & Soon’s owner at the time of the INS inspection of Spring & Soon’s I-9 forms, see Shofi\nDecl. ¶ 4. Mrs. Sung is listed as Y Plus’ incorporator on its certificate of incorporation,\nsee C. Request Admiss. Ex. G, and as Y Plus’ president on its I-9 forms, see id. Ex. J. \nBy letter dated October 21, 1996, Spring & Soon timely requested a hearing in this matter\nthrough its then-attorney Mark C. Kalish. Complainant filed a five-count Complaint with the\nOffice of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) on May 22, 1997. That Complaint,\nwhich echoes the allegations of the NIF, asserts that Spring & Soon hired or continued to employ\nseven listed individuals knowing that they were unauthorized to work in the United States,\nin violation of section 274A(a)(1)(A) or 274A(a)(2) of the INA, as codified at 8 U.S.C. §§\n1324a(a)(1)(A) and 1324a(a)(2). Compl. ¶¶ I.A-E. Complainant alleges that, on August 8, 1995,\na Final Order was served on Respondent Spring & Soon for a first violation of section 274A(a)(1)(A)\nand/or 274A(a)(2) of the INA. Compl. ¶ I.F. Complainant also alleges that Spring & Soon\ncommitted various violations of the employment eligibility verification system, all in violation of\nsection 274A of the INA, as codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1324a. See Compl. ¶¶ II-V. \nOn July 23, 1997, Mr. Kalish filed a motion to withdraw his representation of Spring & Soon\nin this proceeding. In support of his motion, Mr. Kalish stated that, after repeated attempts, he had\nbeen unable to communicate with his client. Specifically, Mr. Kalish said that he had had no\ncommunications with Spring & Soon since approximately January 1997. Mot. Withdraw ¶ 6. After\nreceiving a copy of the Complaint in late May or early June 1997, Mr. Kalish tried to telephone\nSpring & Soon, but found that telephone service was disconnected. Id. ¶ 7. Mr. Kalish stated that,\non June 16, 1997, he visited Spring & Soon’s business premises at 262 West 38th Street, 15th Floor,\nNew York, New York, but that the business no longer was there. Id. ¶ 8. Mr. Kalish stated that he\nthen requested from directory assistance any listings for “Spring & Soon Fashions” in any\nof New York City’s five boroughs, but that there were no such listing . Id. ¶ 9. Finally,\nMr. Kalish asserted that, to the best of his knowledge, Spring & Soon no longer was doing business.\nId. I granted Mr. Kalish’s motion to withdraw by order dated July 24, 1997.\nComplainant filed its Motion to Amend Complaint and a document entitled “Second\nAmended Complaint”3 on September 3, 1997. Through its proposed amendment, Complainant\nsought to add Y Plus S Corporation d/b/a Y Prus S Corporation as a respondent on the grounds that\nit was a mere continuation of Respondent Spring & Soon Fashion Inc. and, thus, could be held\nresponsible for the debts and/or liabilities of Spring & Soon. Also on September 3, Complainant 8 OCAHO 1003 4\n4 I granted Complainant’s request, communicated by letter on October 10, 1997, to\nextend the previous deadline to October 14. filed its Motion for Default Judgment. Complainant stated that, as of August 14, 1997, no answer\nhad been filed in this case. Mot. Default ¶ 4. Therefore, Respondent had “failed to plead or\notherwise defend within thirty days of the receipt of [the] Complaint as required by 28 C.F.R.\n§ 68.9(a).” Id. ¶ 5. Complainant sought default judgment against both Spring & Soon and Y Plus.\nOn September 11, 1997, I entered an Order Regarding Complainant’s Motion to Amend and\nMotion for Default. In that Order, I noted that Complainant had not explained why Spring & Soon\nshould be considered as doing business through Y Plus S Corporation d/b/a Y Prus S Corporation,\nother than the fact that it might have the same owner. I ordered Complainant to file a legal brief no\nlater than September 30, 1997, in which it would discuss the facts in the record that supported its\nassertion that Spring & Soon is doing business through Y Plus and the applicable legal principles\ngoverning that determination. Since the NIF was not served on Spring & Soon at the address listed\nfor it on the Complaint, I ordered Complainant also to discuss in its brief whether the NIF was\nproperly served on Spring & Soon. I granted leave to the Sungs to file a response to Complainant’s\nMotion to Amend, its brief, and its Motion for Default Judgment no later than October 14, 1997. \nRegarding Complainant’s Motion for Default, I noted that Spring & Soon still had not filed\nan answer as of September 11. I stated that, if I granted Complainant’s Motion to Amend,\nRespondent would have thirty days to answer the amended complaint; even though Spring & Soon\nhad not yet filed an answer to the original Complaint, if an amended complaint is filed, a respondent\nmust receive a chance to answer the complaint as amended. As a result, I stated that I would defer\nruling on the Motion for Default until I had ruled on the Motion to Amend. I explained, however,\nthat Spring & Soon was in default with respect to the original Complaint and, if I denied the Motion\nto Amend, Spring & Soon could face a default judgment. Consequently, I ordered Spring & Soon\nto file an answer to the Complaint immediately upon receipt of my September 11 Order to avoid\nentry of a default judgment. I also ordered Spring & Soon to explain why it did not file an answer\nto the Complaint in a timely manner. \nComplainant filed its Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Amend Complaint on\nOctober 14, 1997.4 On October 17, 1997, Raymond J. Aab filed a Notice of Appearance as legal\ncounsel for Spring & Soon and also filed Respondent’s Answer to the Complaint and its Opposition\nto Complainant’s Motion to Amend Complaint. Spring & Soon’s Opposition also responded to\nComplainant’s Motion for Default Judgment. In its Answer, Spring & Soon responded to the factual\nallegations of the Complaint and asserted as an affirmative defense that the NIF and the Complaint\nin this case were not properly served on Spring & Soon. 8 OCAHO 1003 5\nBy Order dated December 9, 1997, I granted Complainant’s Motion to Amend Complaint\nby adding Y Plus as a respondent. Although I did not find that Y Plus was in fact a mere\ncontinuation of Spring & Soon, I granted Complainant’s Motion to Amend by adding Y Plus as a\nrespondent because Complainant had alleged enough information to allow it the opportunity to prove\nits allegations as to Y Plus. See Order Granting C.’s Mot. Amend at 11. Also in the December 9\nOrder, I addressed the issue of whether the NIF was properly served on Respondent Spring & Soon.\nFor the reasons stated in that Order, I found that, even assuming service was not accomplished in\ncompliance with the applicable regulation, dismissing the case to make the INS comply with the\nrelevant regulation was unwarranted. See id. at 3-8. Additionally, I denied Complainant’s Motion\nfor Default and gave Respondents until January 8, 1998, to file their answer to the Amended\nComplaint. \nRespondents filed their Answer to the Amended Complaint on January 12, 1998. Although\nthe certificate of service reveals that this Answer was served by mail on January 7, 1998, “file”\nmeans that the document must be received in my office by the given deadline, not that it merely must\nbe postmarked by then, see 28 C.F.R. § 68.8(b) (1997). I had explicitly reminded Respondents of\nthat provision, see Order Granting C.’s Mot. Amend at 13 n.13, but they still failed to ensure that\ntheir Answer was filed by the January 8 deadline. Respondents responded to the allegations\ncontained in the Amended Complaint, see Ans. to Amended Compl. ¶¶ 1-15, and asserted\ntwo affirmative defenses. As a first affirmative defense, Respondents alleged that service of the NIF\nwas “not made in compliance with legal requirement.” Ans. to Amended Compl. ¶ 16. As a second\naffirmative defense, Respondents alleged that “Y Plus S Corporation and/or Y Prus S Corporation\nis a separate and distinct entity from [Spring & Soon], and [Spring & Soon] is not responsible for\nthe liabilities and conduct of Y Plus S Corporation and Y Prus S Corporation and vice versa.” Ans.\nto Amended Compl. ¶ 17.\nOn April 23, 1998, Complainant filed a Motion for Summary Decision and a Motion to\nCompel Response to Request for Production of Documents and Answer to Interrogatories. In the\nMotion for Summary Decision, Complainant asserted that on March 13, 1998, Complainant served\nrequests for admissions on Respondents (which are attached to its Motion), and that Respondents,\nas of April 21, 1998, had not responded to the same. In the Motion to Compel, Complainant\nsimilarly asserted that it served Respondents with interrogatories and requests for document\nproduction on March 13, and that Respondents had failed to respond to those discovery requests as\nof April 21. \nRespondents were entitled to file a response to Complainant’s Motion for Summary Decision\non or before May 6, 1998; they also were entitled to file a response to Complainant’s Motion to\nCompel on or before May 7, 1998. See 28 C.F.R. §§ 68.11(b); 68.8(c)(2) (1997). Respondents had\nfiled no responses to either of those Motions by the appropriate deadlines. On May 8, 1998, I issued\na Show Cause Order (SCO) in which I gave Respondents the opportunity to state whether their\nattorney’s office received the requests for admissions and the Motion for Summary Decision, and\nwhen each was received, and to show cause why I should not deem each of the admissions admitted 8 OCAHO 1003 6\n5 If available, parallel Westlaw citations will be given to OCAHO decisions. OCAHO\ndecisions published in Westlaw are located in the “FIM-OCAHO” database. by Respondents pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 68.21(b). Respondents filed their Response to the SCO on\nMay 21, 1998. They attached to the Response copies of their answers to Complainant’s requests for\nadmissions, as well as their answers to Complainant’s interrogatories and requests for production\nof documents, which had been served on Complainant the previous day, on May 20, 1998.\nRespondents’ counsel stated several reasons for his failure to respond to Complainant’s discovery\nrequests in a timely manner, but he never explained why he did not seek an extension of time in\nwhich to answer discovery. Despite my explicit requirement in the SCO, Respondents’ counsel also\nfailed to state when his office received Complainant’s Request for Admissions and Motion for\nSummary Decision. Respondents asked that I direct Complainant to accept Respondents’ answers\nto its discovery requests. See R. Response SCO ¶ 4. Respondents still have not responded to\nComplainant’s Motion for Summary Decision. \nOn May 27, 1998, Complainant filed a motion to substitute Complainant’s counsel, stating\nthat INS Assistant District Counsel Mimi Tsankov, who had been handling this case on\nComplainant’s behalf, no longer works at the INS. Complainant also entered a notice of appearance\nfor INS Assistant District Counsel Paul Szeto. I noted in my Order Staying Proceeding that\nRespondents were entitled to file a response to the substitution motion on or before June 11, 1998.\nSee 28 C.F.R. §§ 68.11(b), 68.8(c)(2) (1997). Respondents have not filed such a response. \nBy Order dated May 29, 1998, I stayed this proceeding until I ruled on Complainant’s Motion\nfor Summary Decision.\nIII.STANDARDS FOR SUMMARY DECISION\nThe Rules of Practice and Procedure that govern this proceeding permit the Administrative\nLaw Judge (ALJ or Judge) to “enter a summary decision for either party if the pleadings, affidavits,\nmaterial obtained by discovery or otherwise, or matters officially noticed show that there is\nno genuine issue as to any material fact and that a party is entitled to summary decision.” 28 C.F.R.\n§ 68.38(c) (1996). Although OCAHO has its own procedural rules for cases arising under its\njurisdiction, the OCAHO Rules of Practice specifically authorize the Judge to reference analogous\nprovisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and federal case law interpreting them\nfor guidance in deciding issues based on the rules governing OCAHO proceedings. OCAHO\nRule 68.38(c) is similar to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c), which provides for summary\njudgment in cases before the federal district courts. As such, Rule 56(c) and federal case law\ninterpreting it are useful in deciding whether summary decision is appropriate under the OCAHO\nrules. United States v. Aid Maintenance Co. , 6 OCAHO 893, at 3 (1996), 1996 WL 73594, at *35\n(Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Complainant’s Motion for Partial Summary 8 OCAHO 1003 7\n6 Citations to OCAHO precedents in bound Volumes 1-2, Administrative Decisions\nUnder Employer Sanctions and Unfair Immigration-Related Employment Practices Laws of the\nUnited States , and bound Volumes 3-5, Administrative Decisions Under Employer Sanctions,\nUnfair Immigration-Related Employment Practices and Civil Penalty Document Fraud Laws of\nthe United States , reflect consecutive decision and order reprints within those bound volumes;\npinpoint citations to pages within those issuances are to specific pages, seriatim, of the pertinent\nvolume. Pinpoint citations to OCAHO precedents in volumes subsequent to Volume 5, however,\nare to pages within the original issuances. Decision)(citing Mackentire v. Ricoh Corp. , 5 OCAHO 191, 193 (Ref. No. 746)6 (1995), 1995 WL\n367112, at *2 and Alvarez v. Interstate Highway Constr. , 3 OCAHO 399, 405 (Ref. No. 430) (1992),\n1992 WL 535567, at *5, aff’d, Alvarez v. OCAHO , 996 F.2d 310 (10th Cir. 1993) (table form; text\navailable in 1993 WL 213912)); United States v. Tri Component Product Corp. , 5 OCAHO 765, 767\n(Ref. No. 821) (1995), 1995 WL 813122, at *2 (Order Granting Complainant’s Motion for Summary\nDecision) (citing same).\nFacts are deemed material only if they will affect the outcome of the proceeding. See\nAid Maintenance , 6 OCAHO 893, at 4, 1996 WL 735954, at *3 (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,\nInc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986)); Tri Component , 5 OCAHO at 768, 1995 WL 813122, at *3 (citing same\nand United States v. Primera Enters., Inc. , 4 OCAHO 259, 260-61 (Ref. No. 615) (1994), 1994 WL\n269753, at *2); United States v. Manos & Assocs., Inc. , 1 OCAHO 877, 878 (Ref. No. 130) (1989),\n1989 WL 433857, at * 2 (Order Granting in Part Complainant’s Motion for Summary Decision).\nAn issue of material fact is genuine if it has a “real basis in the record.” Tri Component , 5 OCAHO\nat 768, 1995 WL 813122, at *3 (citing Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio , 475 U.S. 574,\n586-87 (1986)). In deciding whether a genuine issue of material fact exists, the court must view all\nfacts and all reasonable inferences to be drawn from them “in the light most favorable to the non-\nmoving party.” Id. (citing Matsushita , 475 U.S. at 587 and Primera , 4 OCAHO at 261, 1994 WL\n269753, at *2).\nThe party requesting summary decision carries the initial burden of demonstrating the\nabsence of any genuine issues of material fact. Id. (citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett , 477 U.S. 317,\n323 (1986)). Additionally, the moving party has the burden of showing that it is entitled to judgment\nas a matter of law. United States v. Alvand, Inc. , 1 OCAHO 1958, 1959 (Ref. No. 296) (1991), 1991\nWL 717207, at *2 (Decision and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Complainant’s Motion\nfor Partial Summary Decision) (citing Richards v. Neilsen Freight Lines , 810 F.2d 898 (9th Cir.\n1987)). After the moving party has met its burden, “the opposing party must then come forward with\n‘specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.’” Tri Component , 5 OCAHO at 768,\n1995 WL 813122, at *2 (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)). The party opposing summary decision may\nnot “rest upon conclusory statements contained in its pleadings.” Alvand, 1 OCAHO at 1959, 1991\nWL 717207, at *2 (citing Nilsson, Robbins, Dalgarn, Berliner, Carson & Wurst v. Louisiana\nHydrolec , 854 F.2d 1538 (9th Cir. 1988)). The Rules of Practice and Procedure governing OCAHO\nproceedings specifically provide: 8 OCAHO 1003 8\n7 As the OCAHO rule regarding requests for admissions is very similar to Rule 36,\nfederal case law interpreting Rule 36 may be informative in construing the provisions of\n28 C.F.R. § 68.21. Cf. United States v. Aid Maintenance Co. , 6 OCAHO 893, at 3 (1996), \n1996 WL 73594, at *3 (using Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provisions concerning summary\njudgment and federal case law regarding them as guidelines in interpreting similar OCAHO\nrules governing summary decision).[w]hen a motion for summary decision is made and supported as provided in this\nsection, a party opposing the motion may not rest upon the mere allegations or\ndenials of such pleading. Such response must set forth specific facts showing that\nthere is a genuine issue of fact for the hearing.\n28 C.F.R. § 68.38(b) (1997). \nUnder the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may consider any admissions on file\nas part of the basis for summary judgment. Tri Component , 5 OCAHO at 768, 1995 WL 813122,\nat *3 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)). Similarly, summary decision may be based on matters deemed\nadmitted. Id. (citing Primera , 4 OCAHO at 261, 1994 WL 269753, at *2 and United States v.\nGoldenfield Corp. , 2 OCAHO 162, 165 (Ref. No. 321) (1991), 1991 WL 531744, at *3). \nIV.LEGAL ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION\nA.Requests for Admissions\nComplainant’s Motion for Summary Decision is based largely on the answers deemed\nadmitted to its Request for Admissions. Requests for admissions are deemed admitted if not\nresponded to within thirty days of service. See 28 C.F.R. § 68.21(b) (1997); see also Fed. R. Civ.\nP. 36(a).7 If the requests for admission are served by ordinary mail, the responding party has\nfive additional days in which to serve its answers and/or objections. See 28 C.F.R. § 68.8(c)(2)\n(1997). The requests automatically are deemed admitted if the party from whom the admissions are\nsought does not respond within the appropriate time limit. See Beberaggi v. New York City Transit\nAuth., No. 93 Civ. 1737 (SWK), 1994 WL 18556, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 1994) (citing, inter alia ,\nDonovan v. Carls Drug Co. , 703 F.2d 650, 651 (2d Cir. 1983)); American Technology Corp. v. Mah ,\n174 F.R.D. 687, 690 (D. Nev. 1997). A motion to deem the requests admitted is not\nnecessary. See Beberaggi , 1994 WL 18556, at *2; Mah, 174 F.R.D. at 690 (denying a motion to\ndeem requests for admissions admitted on the grounds that it was unnecessary, given the automatic\neffect of Rule 36(a)). \nIn the present case, Complainant served its Request for Admissions via first class mail on\nMarch 13, 1998. Respondents’ answers and/or objections to those requests should have been served\non or before April 17, 1998, but Respondents did not do so. In fact, Respondents did not serve their 8 OCAHO 1003 9\n8 The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “may be used as a general guideline in any\nsituation not provided for or controlled by [the OCAHO Rules], the Administrative Procedure\nAct, or by any other applicable statute, executive order, or regulation.” 28 C.F.R. § 68.1 (1997).answers to the requests for admissions until May 20, 1998, attached as part of its response to my\nMay 8 Show Cause Order. When Respondents failed to respond to Complainant’s Request for\nAdmissions in a timely manner, the matters of which Complainant sought admissions automatically\nwere deemed admitted.\nAdmissions can be withdrawn and/or amended, upon motion. See 28 C.F.R. § 68.21(d)\n(1997) (“Any matter admitted under this section is conclusively established unless the\nAdministrativ e Law Judge upon motion permits withdrawal or amendment of the admission.”); see\nalso Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(b). In their Response to the SCO, Respondents ask that I order Complainant\nto accept their responses to Complainant’s discovery requests, including their answers to the requests\nfor admissions. See R. Response SCO ¶ 4. Respondents also state reasons in support of the\nrequested relief. See id. ¶ 3. I will treat Respondents’ Response to the SCO as a motion to withdraw\nand to amend their prior admissions. See Rohman v. Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. , 923\nF. Supp. 42, 46 n.2 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (treating party’s request that its responses to requests for\nadmissions be deemed timely filed, made in the party’s counsel’s affirmation in opposition to the\nopponent’s motion for summary judgment, as a formal Rule 36(b) motion when, among other things,\nthe grounds upon which the requested relief was sought were “clearly set forth” in the affirmation).\nThe OCAHO Rules of Practice provide no standard for permitting the withdrawal and/or\namendment of admissions made in the context of requests for admissions. The Federal Rules of\nCivil Procedure, however, provide such a standard.8 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(b). Under the Federal\nRules, the trial judge “ may permit withdrawal or amendment when the presentation of the merits of\nthe action will be subserved thereby and the party who obtained the admission fails to satisfy the\ncourt that withdrawal or amendment will prejudice that party in maintaining the action or defense\non the merits.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(b) (emphasis added). “[T]he decision to excuse [a party] from\nits admissions is in the court’s discretion.” Donovan v. Carls Drug Co., Inc. , 703 F.2d 650, 651-52\n(2d Cir. 1983). “Because the language of the Rule is permissive, the court is not required to make\nan exception to Rule 36 even if both the merits and prejudice issues cut in favor of the party seeking\nexception to the rule.” Id. at 652; see also American Express Travel Related Servs. Co., Inc. v.\nLadouceur (In re Ladouceur) , No. 95-CV-271 (RSP), 1996 WL 596718, at *3 (N.D.N.Y. Oct. 15,\n1996); O’Neill v. Medad , 166 F.R.D. 19, 22 (E.D. Mich. 1996) (citing Ropfogel v. United States ,\n138 F.R.D. 579, 582 (D. Kan. 1991); Carls Drug, 703 F.2d at 652; Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Coca-\nCola Co. , 123 F.R.D. 97, 103 (D. Del. 1988); and Kleckner v. Glover Trucking Corp. , 103 F.R.D.\n553, 557 (M.D. Pa. 1984)). 8 OCAHO 1003 10\nIn the Response to the SCO, Respondents’ attorney, Raymond Aab, gave several reasons for\nfailing to respond to Complainant’s Request for Admissions in a timely manner. Mr. Aab stated that\nhe was unable to respond to Complainant’s discovery requests sooner because “[t]he requests were\nquite voluminous and the respondent’s principal and person assisting in obtaining the requested\ndocuments and answers to the discovery requests, Mr. Sung, was unable to obtain much of the\nrequested documents until May 19th.” R. Response SCO ¶ 3(a). Mr. Aab also stated the “process\nwas rendered more problematic, because Mr. Sung speaks only halting English and he needed to\nreturn to [Respondents’ counsel’s] office three time to assist in the preparation of the respondents’\nresponses to the discovery requests before he fully understood.” Id. Additionally, Mr. Aab stated\nthat he was engaged in a three-week criminal trial that “concerned allegations of fraud and\ninvolved very complicated issues and facts,” and that his “time was virtually fully occupied with\nthat trial,” which did not end until 5:30 p.m. on May 19. Id. ¶ 3(b). Mr. Aab, however, did not\nexplain why he did not seek relief from the Court to expand the deadline to respond to\nComplainant’s discovery requests. \nRespondents have not shown good cause for failing to respond to Complainant’s Request for\nAdmissions in a timely manner or for failing to request an extension of time in which to respond.\nAs of May 20, the date on the Response, Mr. Aab stated that he had “been engaged in a criminal trial\nand proceedings . . . for the past three weeks.” Id. Given that time frame, Mr. Aab’s trial would\nhave started sometime in the last week of April. Respondents’ response to the Request for\nAdmissions was due April 17. Mr. Aab’s trial did not begin until more than one week after the\nresponse was due. The fact that a trial monopolized Mr. Aab’s time for the three weeks between the\nlast week in April and May 20 explains nothing about why Mr. Aab failed to respond to\nComplainant’s Request for Admissions by the middle of April. Mr. Aab could have asked for an\nextension of time, but he did not. \nThe need to answer other discovery requests also did not excuse Respondents’ obligation to\nrespond to Complainant’s Request for Admissions. Mr. Aab cited a delay in the ability to obtain\nrequested documents as a reason for failing to respond to Complainant’s discovery requests in a\ntimely fashion. See id. ¶ 3(a). Any delay in obtaining the necessary documents, however, did not\njustify a delay in responding to the Request for Admissions. \nComplainant’s Request for Admissions was not voluminous. When Respondents finally\nresponded to the requests, they denied most of them. Respondents did not need two months to\nanswer the Request for Admissions. \nFinally, Respondents did not bother to respond to Complainant’s Request for Admissions\nuntil prompted by my May 8 SCO. Not only did Mr. Aab let the deadline for responding to the\nRequest pass, but he persisted in his lack of attention and action when Complainant filed its Motion\nfor Summary Decision, which was based in large part on the admitted requests. The Motion notified\nRespondents’ counsel that Complainant was seeking judgment based on the matters admitted when\nRespondents failed to answer the Request for Admissions by the deadline. Despite the seriousness\nof this action, Respondents’ counsel did not immediately answer the Request and move to permit 8 OCAHO 1003 11\nRespondents to withdraw and to amend their admissions. Not only did Respondents fail to act with\nthe urgency that this case deserved, but they persisted in their neglect until prompted by my SCO.\nAlthough Respondents finally answered the Request for Admissions, they never have responded to\nComplainant’s Motion for Summary Decision. \nCourts have concluded there are situations in which it would not “further the interests of\njustice” to “deem a central fact to have been admitted by the failure of [a] pro se defendant to\nrespond” to requests for admissions. See Local Union No. 38, Sheet Metal Workers’ Int’l Ass’n,\nAFL-CIO v. Tripodi , 913 F. Supp. 290, 294 (S.D.N.Y. 1996). I generally agree with that philosophy,\nbut that factual scenario is not the situation in this case. Respondents are represented by an attorney\nwhose duty it is to advise them in legal matters and actively pursue their interests within the bounds\nof the law. Allowing Respondents to withdraw and amend their admissions under the present\ncircumstances would itself work an injustice by rewarding the glaring disregard of rules designed\nto promote fairness and efficiency in the legal process. Cf. Alexander v. Commissioner of Internal\nRevenue , 926 F.2d 197, 199 (2d Cir. 1991) (stating, in the context of affirming the trial court’s\ndecisions not to permit the late filing of answers to the requests for admissions and to grant summary\njudgment based on matters deemed admitted, that “[i]t is not the role of appellate courts to make\nallowances for the patent disregard of clearly stated trial court rules that are in part designed to\nprovide for the expeditious conclusion of litigation”). All the matters about which Complainant\nsought admissions in its Request for Admissions were admitted when Respondents failed to respond\nto the Request in a timely manner; all those items deemed admitted stay admitted.\nRespondents did not answer the Request for Admissions in time, and, when they did answer,\ndid not raise any objections to the requests. Arguably, any potential objections that Respondents\nmight have raised were waived. Cf. Boyle v. Leviton Mfg. Co., Inc. , 94 F.R.D. 33, 36 (S.D. Ind.\n1981) (by answering and not objecting to requests for admissions, party waived objections for\npurposes of later raising them as a bar to being assessed attorney’s fees for failure to admit); Pleasant\nHill Bank v. United States , 60 F.R.D. 1, 4 n.1 (W.D. Mo. 1973) (by answering request for admission,\nparty waived objection that it later raised in brief opposing motion for summary judgment). \nEven if objections had not been waived, the requests for admissions in this case appear\nto be proper. A couple of Complainant’s requests, that Y Plus is a successor in interest of Spring\n& Soon and that Y Plus is a mere continuation of Spring & Soon’s business, C. Request Admiss.\nSec. I ¶¶ 17, 23, presented the potential issue of whether they called for pure conclusions of law. \nRule 36 was amended in 1970 to resolve a conflict “in the court decisions as to whether\na request to admit matters of ‘opinion’ and matters involving ‘mixed law and fact’ is proper under\nthe rule.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 36 advisory committee’s note. Rule 36 now states that requests for\nadmissions may “relate to statements or opinions of fact or of the application of law to\nfact,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a), thereby “eliminat[ing] the requirement that the matters be ‘of fact,’”\nsee Fed. R. Civ. P. 36 advisory committee’s note. 8 OCAHO 1003 12\n9 Some post-1970 cases still say that requests that call for legal conclusions, even in\nrelation to the facts of the case, or that go to central facts in dispute are improper. See, e.g. ,\nWhitaker v. Belt Concepts of America, Inc. (In re Olympia Holding Corp.) , 189 B.R. 846, 853\n(Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995). Those cases, however, cite to pre-1970 case law, or to other post-1970\ncases that cite to pre-1970 case law, in support of their position. Requests that call for a pure conclusion of law are improper, but requests that ask for a\nconclusion of law in relation to the facts of the actual case at hand are acceptable. See Abbott v.\nUnited States, 177 F.R.D. 92, 93 (N.D.N.Y. 1997); Fed. R. Civ. P. 36 advisory committee’s note\n(“The amended provision does not authorize requests for admissions of law unrelated to the facts\nof the case.”); see also Audiotext Communications Network, Inc. v. US Telecom, Inc. , No. Civ. A.\nNo. 94-2395-GTV, 1995 WL 625744, at *6 (D. Kan. 1995) (requests that seek application of law\nto the facts of the case are acceptable). Allowing requests that call for conclusions of law in relation\nto the facts of the case meets the Rule 36 objective of narrowing the disputed issues in the case. See\nFed. R. Civ. P. 36 advisory committee’s note (“An admission of a matter involving the application\nof law to fact may, in a given case, even more clearly narrow the issues.”); Leviton Mfg. , 94 F.R.D.\nat 35-36. In a related vein, “[t]here is nothing improper about a request simply because it goes to\nan ultimate fact that may be dispositive of the case . . . .” Hart v. Dow Chemical , No. 95 C 1811\n1997 WL 627645, at *8 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 30, 1997).\nIn Abbott, a party requested admissions of law that were based exclusively on hypothetical\nfacts given in the requests. See Abbott, 177 F.R.D. at 93. The court ruled that such requests were\nimproper: \nAlthough admittedly the boundary line is not always plain between\npermissible questions relating to the application of law to fact and objectionable\nquestions relating to pure questions of law, the questions posed by plaintiff in this\ncase fall outside the bounds of proper discovery. Most telling is that plaintiffs have\nnot posed proper questions requiring application of law to the facts peculiar to this\ncase to clarify the government’s legal theories; rather, plaintiffs have posed improper\nhypothetical factual scenarios unrelated to the facts here to ascertain answers to pure\nquestions of law. This they cannot do. \nId. \nIn the present case, Complainant has not posed requests for admissions based on hypothetical\nscenarios. The requests regarding Y Plus’ status as a successor in interest to and mere continuation\nof Spring & Soon involve conclusions of law, but in relation to the facts of this case. That is\nsomething Rule 36 clearly permits since its 1970 amendment.9 8 OCAHO 1003 13\n10 Respondents have admitted that the document attached to Complainant’s Request \nor Admissions as Exhibit E, Spring & Soon’s Certificate of Incorporation, is genuine. See\nC. Request Admiss. Sec. VI. B.Liability Issues\nTo rule on Complainant’s Motion for Summary Decision, I must examine whether\nComplainant has demonstrated a lack of genuine issue of material fact and is entitled to judgment\nas a matter of law. “[I]t is well settled that a failure to respond to a request for admissions will\npermit the district court to enter summary judgment if the facts admitted by operation of Rule 36(a)\nare dispositive of the case.” Pleasant Hill Bank v. United States , 60 F.R.D. 1 (W.D. Mo. 1973)\n(citing, inter alia , Moosman v. Blitz, Inc. , 358 F.2d 686, 688 (2d Cir. 1966)); see also Donovan v.\nCarls Drug Co., Inc. , 703 F.2d 650, 651 (2d Cir. 1983). “[A]dmissions under Rule 36, even those\nmade upon a party’s default in responding, may serve as the factual predicate for summary\njudgment.” Pakistan Int’l Airlines v. Travel Link Int’l, Ltd. , No. 90 CIV. 1703 (PNL), 1991 WL\n130182, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 9, 1991) (citing Carls Drug , 703 F.2d at 651).\n1.Liability of Spring & Soon\na.Count I: knowing hire/continue to hire\nIn Count I of the Complaint, Complainant alleges that Respondent Spring & Soon hired\nseven named individuals for employment in the United States after November 6, 1986, that those\nseven employees were aliens not authorized for employment in the United States, and that\nResponde nt hired those employees knowing that they were aliens not authorized to work in the\nUnited States, in violation of section 274A(a)(1)(A) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(A).\nAmended Compl. ¶¶ I.A-D. Alternatively, Complainant alleges that Respondent continued to\nemploy the seven individuals knowing that they were aliens not authorized for employment in the\nUnited States, in violation of section 274A(a)(2) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1324A(a)(2), and 8 C.F.R.\n§ 274a.3. Id. ¶ I.E. It is unlawful for a person or other entity to hire for employment in\nthe United States an alien knowing the alien is unauthorized for employment in the United States,\n8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(A) (1994), and/or to continue to employ an alien already hired knowing the\nalien is unauthorized for employment in the United States, id. § 1324a(a)(2).\nRespondents have admitted that the seven individuals listed in Count I were illegal aliens\nunauthorized to work in the United States at the time of hire, see C. Request Admiss. Sec. V, and\nthat Spring & Soon hired them knowing they were unauthorized for employment, see C. Request\nAdmiss. Sec. I ¶ 15. The seven individuals were hired after November 6, 1986, as alleged in the\nComplaint, because Spring & Soon was not incorporated until after that date. See C. Request\nAdmiss. Ex. E10 (Mrs. Sung signed Spring & Soon’s Certificate of Incorporation on October 22,\n1991). 8 OCAHO 1003 14\nIn relation to Count I, Complainant has demonstrated the absence of genuine issues of\nmaterial fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. I find that Spring & Soon violated\n8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(A) by knowingly hiring the seven individuals named in Count I. I GRANT\nComplainant’s Motion for Summary Decision with respect to Spring & Soon’s liability for\nCount I.\nb.Count II: failure to prepare/present I-9 forms\nIn Count II, Complainant alleges that Respondent hired five individuals for employment in\nthe United States after November 6, 1986, and that Respondent failed to prepare the Employment\nEligibility Verification Form (I-9 form) for those five employees, in violation of section\n274A(a)(1)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(B). Amended Compl. ¶¶ II.A, B, D.\nAlternatively, Complainant alleges that Respondent failed to present the I-9 forms for those\nfive individuals at a scheduled inspection, in violation of section 274A(a)(1)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.\n§ 1324a(a)(1)(B). Id. ¶¶ II.C, E. An employer must prepare an I-9 form for each employee hired\nafter November 6, 1986, see 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324a(a)(1)(B), (b)(1) (1994); 8 C.F.R. §§ 274a.2(a),\n(b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(ii) (1996), and present any such I-9 forms at INS inspections, see 8 U.S.C.\n§§ 1324a(a)(1)(B), (b)(3) (1994); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(2)(ii) (1997).\nIn its Answer to the Amended Complaint, Spring & Soon admits it “employed persons who\nidentified themselves as indicated in the Complaint, or by different names.” Ans. to Amended\nCompl. ¶ 3. Respondents have admitted that Spring & Soon did not prepare and/or present at the\nJanuary 26, 1996, scheduled inspection I-9 forms for the five listed people. See C. Request Admiss.\nSec. 1 ¶¶ 4, 9; Sec. IV. Spring & Soon admits that it hired the five people name in Count II. Since\nSpring & Soon was not incorporated until after November 6, 1986, it may be inferred that the hiring\ntook place after that date.\nThere are no genuine issues of material fact regarding Count II’s allegation of failure to\nprepare and/or present I-9 forms at the scheduled inspection, and Complainant is entitled to judgment\nas a matter of law. Therefore, I GRANT Complainant’s Motion as to Spring & Soon’s liability for\nCount II.\nc.Count III: Sections one and two\nIn Count III, Complainant alleges that Respondent hired twenty-three individuals for\nemployment in the United States after November 6, 1986, that Respondent failed to ensure that those\ntwenty-three individuals properly completed section one of the I-9 form, and that Respondent failed\nto properly complete section two of the I-9 form for those employees, in violation of section\n274A(a)(1)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(B). Amended Compl. ¶¶ III.A-D. An employer\nmust ensure that its employees properly complete section one of their respective I-9 forms, see\n8 U.S.C. §§ 1324a(a)(1)(B), (b)(2) (1994); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(i)(A) (1997), and an employer\nmust properly complete section two of the I-9 form, see 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324a(a)(1)(B), (b)(1) (1994);\n8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(ii)(B) (1997). 8 OCAHO 1003 15\n11 In section one, the employee must attest, by marking the appropriate box, to one of \nthe following: (1) that he or she is a citizen or national of the United States; (2) that he or she\nis a lawful permanent resident; or (3) that he or she is an alien authorized to work until a\ndesignated date. If the employee marks one of the latter two options, then he or she also must\ninclude his or her alien number in the space provided. See Form I-9, OMB No. 1115-0136\n(rev. Nov. 21, 1991). \n12 List A documents establish both identity and employment eligibility.\n Acceptable List A documents are noted at 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(b)(1)(B) (1994) and\n8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(v)(A) (1997). \n13 List B documents establish identity only. Acceptable List B documents are noted at\n8 U.S.C. § 1324a(b)(1)(D) (1994) and 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(v)(B) (1997). \n14 List C documents establish employment eligibility only. Acceptable List C documents\nare noted at 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(b)(1)(C) (1994) and 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(v)(C) (1997). \n15 Instead, those two I-9 forms contain the words “I.D. requested” under List A and\n“none” under List B. Respondents have admitted that the I-9 forms attached as Exhibit A to Complainant’s\nRequest for Admissions are genuine and relate to the named individuals. See C. Request Admiss.\nSec. II. The I-9 forms reveal errors in sections one and two for all twenty-three listed people.\nSection one lacks the required attestation11 for all twenty-three people. One I-9 form, that belonging\nto Bokyon Cheon (¶ III.A.4), has the “lawful permanent resident” box marked, but the employee\nfailed to include the required alien number. All of the other I-9 forms have no attestation boxes\nmarked, and “none” typed or written in the blank for alien numbers.\nIn section two, all twenty-three forms lack sufficient documentation in List A or Lists B and\nC. An employer must verify an employee’s identity and employment eligibility by examining and\nrecording information in section two about a List A document,12 or by examining and recording\ninformation in section two about both a List B document13 and a List C document.14 See 8 U.S.C.\n§ 1324a(b)(1)(A) (1994); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(v) (1997). Two I-9 forms, belonging to Bokyon\nCheon (¶ III.A.4) and Rosa Maria Fournier (¶ III.A.9), contain social security card information in\nList C, but have no document information in List B and List A.15 One form, belonging to Pedro\nCabrera (¶ III.A.1), displays “I.D. requested” typed under List A, and Lists B and C are completely\nblank. All of the remaining I-9 forms in Count III have “I.D. requested” typed in List A and “none”\ntyped in Lists B and C.\nThe twenty-three individuals named in Count III were hired after November 6, 1986, as\nalleged in the Complaint, because Spring & Soon was not incorporated until after that date, and\nbecause the dates of hire listed in section two on all the forms fall after that date. Evidence on the 8 OCAHO 1003 16\nface of the forms reveals that section one lacks the required attestation and that the documentation\nportion of section two lacks essential document information. As there are no genuine issues of\nmaterial fact in relation to Count III, and as Complainant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law,\nI GRANT Complainant’s Motion with respect to Spring & Soon’s liability for this count.\nd.Count IV: Section two\nIn Count IV, Complainant alleges that Respondent hired one individual for employment in\nthe United States after November 6, 1986, and failed to properly complete section two of the I-9\nform for that individual, in violation of section 274A(a)(1)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(B).\nAmended Compl. ¶¶ IV.A-C. An employer must properly complete section two of the I-9 form. See\n8 U.S.C. §§ 1324a(a)(1)(B), (b)(1) (1994); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(ii)(B) (1997). \nRespondents have admitted that the I-9 form for this individual, attached as part of\nExhibit A of Complainant’s Request for Admissions, is genuine and relates to the individual. See\nC. Request Admiss. Sec. II. Section two of this employee’s I-9 form lacks sufficient documentation.\nUnder List A, “petition approved” appears in the space designated for the document title, “I.N.S.”\nappears in the space designated for the issuing authority, and “I.D. requested” appears in the space\ndesignated for the document number. A photocopy of a Form I-797 accompanies this I-9 form, but\nattaching a copy of the document to the I-9 form without filling in all the necessary information on\nthe face of the I-9 form does not satisfy the documentation recording requirement, see United States\nv. Corporate Loss Prevention Assocs. , 6 OCAHO 908, at 6 (February 5, 1997), 1997 WL 131365,\nat *4 (Modification by the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer of Administrative Law Judge’s\nOrder). At any rate, a Form I-797 is not an acceptable List A document. See 8 U.S.C. §\n1324a(b)(1)(B) (1994); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(v)(A) (1997). In addition, this I-9 form contains the\nword “none” in Lists B and C. \nThe employee in question was hired after November 6, 1986, as shown by the facts that the\ndate of hire noted in section two of her I-9 form falls after that date, and that Spring & Soon was not\nincorporated until after that date. Evidence on the face of the I-9 form that necessary elements are\nmissing in section two demonstrates that Spring & Soon failed in its duty to properly complete\nsection two. As there are no genuine issues of material fact in relation to Count IV, and as\nComplainant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, I GRANT Complainant’s Motion as to\nSpring & Soon’s liability for this count. \ne.Count V: Section one\nIn Count V, Complainant alleges that Respondent hired one individual for employment in\nthe United States after November 6, 1986, and failed to ensure that individual properly completed\nsection one of his I-9 form, in violation of section 274A(a)(1)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 8 OCAHO 1003 17\n16 The court in Rols Capital , however, found it unnecessary to decide that question\nbecause the New Jersey state law that it was applying recognizes the same four exceptions \nto the general non-liability rule that courts have applied to federal claims. See Rols Capital , \n901 F. Supp. at 635. § 1324a(a)(1)(B). Amended Compl. ¶¶ V.A-C. An employer must ensure that its employees\nproperly complete section one of their respective I-9 forms. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324a(a)(1)(B), (b)(2)\n(1994); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(i)(A) (1997). \nRespondents have admitted that the I-9 form for this individual, attached as part of\nExhibit A of Complainant’s Request for Admissions, is genuine and that it relates to the individual.\nSee C. Request Admiss. Sec. II. Section one of this I-9 form lacks the required attestation. No\nattestation boxes are marked, and “none” appears in the space designated for an alien number. \nThe employee in question was hired after November 6, 1986, as evidenced by the facts that\nthe date of hire listed in section two of his I-9 form falls after that date, and that Spring & Soon was\nnot incorporated until after that date. Evidence on the face of the I-9 form that the necessary\nattestation is missing in section one demonstrates that Spring & Soon failed in its duty to make sure\nthat the employee properly completed section one. As there are no genuine issues of material fact\nin relation to Count V, and as Complainant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, I GRANT\nComplainant’s Motion with respect to Spring & Soon’s liability for this count. \n2.Liability of Y Plus (as successor in interest of Spring & Soon)\nRespondents admit that Y Plus is successor in interest to Spring & Soon. See C. Request\nAdmiss. Sec. I ¶ 17. A successor corporation generally is not responsible for the debts and liabilities\nof its predecessor. See R.C.M. Executive Gallery Corp. v. Rols Capital Co. , 901 F. Supp. 630, 635\n(S.D.N.Y. 1995); Delgado v. Matrix-Churchill Co. , 613 N.Y.S.2d 242, 243 (App. Div. 1994). Under\nNew York state law, there are four exceptions to that general rule: (1) when the successor\ncorporation expressly or impliedly assumes such liability; (2) when there is a de facto\nconsolidation or merger of the two corporations; (3) when the second corporation is a mere\ncontinuation of the first; or (4) when the transaction was fraudulently executed to escape such\nobligations. Delgado , 613 N.Y.S.2d at 243 (citing Grant-Howard Assocs. v. General Housewares\nCorp., 63 N.Y.2d 291, 296, 482 N.Y.S.2d 225 (1984); Schumacher v. Richards Shear Co. , 59 N.Y.2d\n239, 244 (1983)).\nAt least one federal court questions whether state or federal law should be applied to\ndetermine successor liability for federal causes of action.16 See Rols Capital , 901 F. Supp. at 634.\nAs in Rols Capital , however, that distinction does not matter for present purposes because New York\nstate law and federal law recognize the same four exceptions to the general rule of not holding a\nsuccessor corporation liable for the debts of its predecessor. See id. at 635. Like the New York\ncourts, federal courts will impose successor liability when any of the previously stated 8 OCAHO 1003 18\n17 Successor liability may be even broader in the federal context. The Seventh Circuit\nstates that, “in order to protect federal rights or effectuate federal policies, [successor liability]\nallows lawsuits against even a genuinely distinct purchaser of a business if (1) the successor\nhad notice of the claim before the acquisition; and (2) there was a ‘substantial continuity in the\noperation of the business before and after the sale.’” Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers &\nWarehouse Workers Union (Independent) Pension Fund v. Tasemkin, Inc. , 59 F.3d 48, 49\n(7th Cir. 1995); see also Rols Capital , 901 F. Supp. at 635 n.4 (noting the use of this additional\nexception in the Seventh Circuit and stating that it is used “when the vindication of an important\nstatutory policy necessitates the creation of this additional and even broader exception to the\ncommon-law nonliability rule”). \n18 Lumbard uses the same factors to determine whether a corporation is a mere\ncontinuation of another corporation as it does to determine whether the de facto merger exception\napplies, although it notes that another district court tries to draw a distinction between the two in\nthat “a de facto merger contemplates a selling corporation and a purchasing corporation, [but] ‘a\ncontinuation accomplishes . . . something in the nature of a corporate reorganization, rather than\na mere sale.’” Lumbard , 621 F. Supp. at 1535 n.8 (quoting Ladjevardian v. Laidlaw-Coggeshall,\nInc., 431 F. Supp. 834, 839 (S.D.N.Y. 1977)).four exceptions are present, see id. at 635-36; Lumbard v. Maglia, Inc. , 621 F. Supp. 1529, 1534-35\n(S.D.N.Y. 1985); see also Golden State Bottling Co., Inc. v. NLRB , 414 U.S. 168, 182 n.5 (1973).17\nRespondents have admitted that Y Plus is a mere continuation of Spring & Soon’s business.\nSee C. Request Admiss. Sec. I ¶ 23. Respondents also have admitted sufficient facts that would\njustify the legal conclusion that Y Plus is a mere continuation of Spring & Soon and, thus, will be\nheld responsible for Spring & Soon’s liabilities. \nA variety of factors are considered in determining whether a successor corporation is a mere\ncontinuation of the predecessor,18 such as the following: \n(1) continuity of ownership; (2) a cessation of ordinary business and dissolution of\nthe predecessor as soon as practically and legally possible; (3) assumption by the\nsuccessor of the liabilities ordinarily necessary for the uninterrupted continuation of\nthe business of the predecessor; and (4) a continuity of management, personnel,\nphysical location, assets, and general business operation. \nLumbard , 621 F. Supp. at 1535 (citing Arnold Graphics Indus., Inc. v. Electronic Tabulating Corp. ,\n775 F.2d 38 (2d Cir. 1985)). Not all of these factors are needed to show that a successor corporation\nis a mere continuation of the predecessor. Id. at 1535 (citing Menacho v. Adamson United Co. ,\n420 F. Supp. 128, 133 (D.N.J. 1976)). 8 OCAHO 1003 19\nRespondents have admitted that Y Plus has the same directors, officers and shareholders as\nSpring & Soon. See C. Request Admiss. Sec. I ¶¶ 30-32. They also have admitted that Y Plus\nacquired all or most of Spring & Soon’s assets for cash, see id. Sec. I ¶ 18, that Y Plus paid little or\nno consideration for the transfer of assets to itself from Spring & Soon, see id. Sec. I ¶ 22, and that\nSpring & Soon was unable to pay its creditors’ claims following the transfer of assets to Y Plus, see\nid. Sec. I ¶ 21. \nRespondents have admitted that Y Plus was formed shortly before the time of acquisition of\nSpring & Soon’s assets, see id. Sec. I ¶ 20, and that Spring & Soon ceased business operations and\ndissolved shortly after Spring & Soon transferred its assets to Y Plus, see id. Sec. I ¶ 19.\nRespondents admitted that Y Plus filed for incorporation in New York on February 22, 1996, and\nthat Spring & Soon ceased doing business the following month, during March 1996. See id. Sec.\nI ¶¶ 45-46. \nSpring & Soon and Y Plus share a common business type and even some employees. As a\nresult of Respondents’ admissions, it is conclusively determined that Y Plus manufactures the same\nor similar product as Spring & Soon and that Y Plus uses Spring & Soon production facilities. See\nid. Sec. I ¶¶ 24-25. Specifically, Spring & Soon and Y Plus both engaged and/or engage in the\nbusiness of garment manufacturing. See id. Sec. I ¶¶ 43-44. Respondents have admitted that some\nemployees that worked for Spring & Soon worked for Y Plus. See id. Sec. I. ¶ 26. In particular,\nRespondents admitted that Y Plus hired the following two employees of Spring & Soon: Bernardo\nPerez-R, aka Gilberto Quechol Paccheco, and Maria Rosario Gracia, aka Rosa Garcia-Tenecela. See\nid. Sec. I ¶ 27. In addition, Respondents admit that Y Plus uses Spring & Soon’s business goodwill,\nsee id. Sec. I ¶ 29, that Y Plus holds itself out as the effective continuation of Spring & Soon, see\nid. Sec. I ¶ 35, and that Y Plus uses the same corporate or product name as Spring & Soon, see id.\nSec. I ¶ 36. \nRespondents admit that Mr. Sung owned Spring & Soon, see id. Sec. I ¶ 38. They also admit\nthat he holds or has held stock in Y Plus, see id. Sec. I ¶ 34, and that he works at and has held\na management position at Y Plus, see id. Sec. I ¶¶ 41-42. Respondents admit that Mrs. Sung owns\nY Plus, see id. Sec. I ¶ 37, but also that she held stock in, worked at, and held a management position\nat Spring & Soon, see id. Sec. I ¶¶ 33, 39-40. \nAdditionally, Y Plus filed for incorporation approximately one month after the NIF was\nserved on Spring & Soon. See C. Request Admiss. Sec. I ¶ 45; C. Request Admiss. Ex. G (Y Plus\nCertificate of Incorporation); NIF at 2. All of the above facts provide ample basis for concluding\nthat Y Plus is a mere continuation of Spring & Soon. \nAs a result of Respondents’ admissions, there are no genuine issues of material fact with\nrespect to the issue of whether Y Plus is a mere continuation of Spring & Soon and, thus, is\nresponsible for Spring & Soon’s liabilities. Complainant has demonstrated that it is entitled\nto judgment as a matter of law that Y Plus is a mere continuation of Spring & Soon and that Y Plus 8 OCAHO 1003 20\n19 Spring & Soon previously has been the subject of a Final Order issued by the INS\npursuant to a settlement agreement between Spring & Soon and the INS stemming from\nallegations raised against Spring & Soon in a prior investigation. See C. Request Admiss. Ex. C\n(Final Order), Ex. D (Settlement Agreement). Respondents have admitted to the genuineness of\nthose two documents. See C. Request Admiss. Sec. VII. In the Settlement Agreement, Spring &\nSoon and the INS specifically agreed “that future violations of Section 274A of the [INA] by the\nemployer will be treated as a second or subsequent offense.” C. Request Admiss. Ex. D ¶ 3. The\nSettlement Agreement also provided that the INS Final Order “is a final and unappealable order\npursuant to [INA] Section 274A(e)(3)(B),” and that it “shall have the same force and effect as an\nOrder made after a full hearing.” C. Request Admiss. Ex. D ¶ 6. is accountable for Spring & Soon’s liabilities in this case. Consequently, I GRANT Complainant’s\nMotion for Summary Decision as to Y Plus’ liability for Counts I-V of the Amended Complaint.\nC.Penalty Issues\nIn its Motion for Summary Decision, Complainant asks me to award a civil money penalty\nin the full amount requested in the Amended Complaint. See C. Mot. SD at 3. Interestingly enough,\nComplainant does not ask, in its Motion for Summary Decision, for the imposition of a cease and\ndesist order; Complainant seeks such an order in the Amended Complaint. \n1.Substantive violations\nA first-time violator of the knowing hire provision under 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(1)(A) shall\nreceive an order to cease and desist from such violations and to pay a civil money penalty of not\nless than $250 and not more than $2,000 for each unauthorized alien knowingly hired. See\n8 U.S.C. § 1324a(e)(4)(A)(i) (1994). For a violator of the knowing hire provision who previously\nhas been subject to one order for a knowing hire or continue to employ violation, the INA mandates\na cease and desist order and a civil money penalty of not less than $2,000 and not more than $5,000\nfor each unauthorized alien knowingly hired. See id. § 1324a(e)(4)(A)(ii). \nComplainant seeks a total penalty of $30,800 for the seven violations contained in Count I,\nwhich it says breaks down into $4,440 for each of the seven violations. See Amended Compl. at 3.\nFirst of all, Complainant’s calculation does not compute. If Complainant is seeking a total civil\nmoney penalty with respect to Count I of $30,800, then it would be requesting $4,400, not $4,440,\nfor each of the seven violations. If Complainant is seeking $4,440 for each of the seven violations,\nhowever, then the total requested penalty would be $31,080.\nSecondly, in its Motion, Complainant does not discuss any factors that support the penalty\namount requested, whether it is $4,400 or $4,440 per violation. Complainant demonstrates that the\n$2,000 through $5,000 per violation range is appropriate in this case,19 but it does not establish why\neither $4,400 or $4,440 should be the appropriate level within that range. 8 OCAHO 1003 21\n2.Verification violations\nA person or entity who violates the employment eligibility verification system under\n8 U.S.C. § 1324a(1)(B) shall receive “a civil money penalty in an amount of not less than $100 and\nnot more than $1,000 for each individual with respect to whom such violation occurred.” 8 U.S.C.\n§ 1324a(e)(5) (1994). The statute mandates five factors that must be considered when setting a civil\nmoney penalty for verification violations: (1) size of the business; (2) good faith; (3) seriousness of\nthe violations; (4) whether the individual was an unauthorized alien; and (5) history of previous\nviolations. Id. In assessing civil money penalties for verification, or paperwork, violations, I\ngenerally have followed the line of OCAHO cases that have applied a mathematical, rather than\njudgmental, approach to setting the penalty. See United States v. Carter , 7 OCAHO 931, at 46\n(1997), 1997 WL 602725, at *34; United States v. Skydive Academy of Haw. Corp. , 6 OCAHO 848,\nat 10 (1996), 1996 WL 312123, at *9-10; United States v. Felipe. Inc. , 1 OCAHO 626, 629 (Ref.\nNo. 93), 1989 WL 433965, at *4, aff’d by CAHO , 1 OCAHO 726, 732 (Ref. No. 108) (1989), 1989\nWL 433964, at *5 (holding that the mathematical approach is an acceptable, although not exclusive,\napproach to setting civil money penalties in paperwork cases). The mathematical approach works\nin the following manner:\n[T]he approach [is] to divide $900, the difference between the statutory $1,000\nmaximum and statutory $100 minimum, by five for the five statutory criteria\n[established in 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(e)(5)], arriving at a general amount of $180 for each\npenalty factor. The $180 per factor is not rigidly applied, because certain penalty\nfactors may justify a greater penalty amount than others. \nCarter, 7 OCAHO 931, at 47, 1997 WL 602725, at *34. \nWith respect to Count II, Complainant seeks a civil money penalty of $4,400, or $880 for\neach of the five violations contained therein. See Amended Compl. at 3. For Count III, Complainant\nseeks a penalty of $18,780, which breaks down into a penalty of $660 for each of the three\nviolations contained in Amended Complaint paragraphs III.A.4, 9, and 19, and $840 for each of the\ntwenty remaining violations in the count. See id. at 5. Complainant requests a civil money penalty\nof $820 for the one violation contained in Count IV, see id., and a civil money penalty of $630 for\nthe one violation contained in Count V, see id. at 6. \nComplainant has demonstrated a history of prior violations, see C. Request Admiss. Exs. C,\nD, so aggravation of the civil money penalty is warranted based on that factor. Respondents have\nadmitted that certain individuals were, at the time of hire, illegal aliens unauthorized to work in the\nUnited States, see C. Request Admiss. Sec. V, so Complainant has met its burden of showing that 8 OCAHO 1003 22\n20 Specifically, Respondents have admitted that all five of the individuals listed in\nCount II were unauthorized aliens, and that the individuals listed in Count III paragraphs A.5, \n7, 8, 10, 18, and 20 were unauthorized aliens. Therefore, aggravation of the civil money\npenalty is warranted for those particular paragraphs in Counts II and III based on the presence\nof unauthorized aliens factor. Those paragraphs, however, are not the only ones for which\nComplainant seeks a penalty enhanced more than in other paragraphs. Respondents have\nadmitted that twenty-nine named individuals were taken into INS custody and transported from\nSpring & Soon’s place of business as a result of the INS inspection, see C. Request Admiss.\nSec. I, ¶ 7, but that admission alone does not necessarily mean that all twenty-nine of those\npeople were unauthorized aliens. Also, Complainant has attached documents entitled “Order to\nShow Cause and Notice of Hearing” to some of the I-9 forms that it includes as Exhibit A to its\nRequest for Admissions, but Complainant only asked Respondents to admit that the attached\nI-9 forms are genuine and relate to the named individuals, see C. Request Admiss. Sec. II;\nComplainant did not ask Respondents to admit that the documents accompanying the I-9 forms\nand also included in Exhibit A are accurate and genuine copies. penalty enhancement factor for certain parts of the Complaint.20 Complainant, however, does not\naddress in its Motion for Summary Decision what other factors it alleges warrant enhancement of\nthe civil money penalty. Complainant requests a higher penalty for each paragraph of Counts II-V\nthan is warranted by the penalty factors Complainant has shown. Therefore, Complainant has not\nmet its burden of showing that the full requested civil money penalty for those counts is justified.\nComplainant has not demonstrated that it is entitled to the full civil money penalty requested\nin the Amended Complaint, with respect either to the substantive or to the verification violations.\nComplainant’s Motion for Summary Decision is DENIED as to penalty. \nD. Complainant’s Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production of Documents\nand Answer to Interrogatories\nComplainant served its Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production of Documents\nand Answer to Interrogatories on April 22, 1998. Complainant asserted that it served Respondents\nwith interrogatories and requests for document production on March 13, 1998, and that Respondents\nhad failed to respond to those discovery requests as of April 21. C. Mot. Compel ¶¶ 1-3. Responses\nto those discovery requests were due April 17, 1998. Although Respondents did not answer the\ninterrogatories and request for production of documents on time, they did provide responses attached\nto their Response to the SCO, which was served May 20, 1998. \nComplainant’s Motion to Compel is DENIED as moot because Respondents now have\nresponded to Complainant’s interrogatories and request for production of documents. Nothing in\nthe answers to the interrogatories and request for production of documents will be taken to contradict\nmatters established as a result of the deemed admissions. See 28 C.F.R. § 68.21 (1997) (“Any matter 8 OCAHO 1003 23\n21 “File” means that the document must be received in my office by the given date, not\nthat it merely must be postmarked by then. See 28 C.F.R. § 68.8(b) (1997). admitted under this section is conclusively established unless the Administrative Law Judge upon\nmotion permits withdrawal or amendment of the admission.”) (emphasis added); see also Fed. R.\nCiv. P. 36(b) (“Any matter admitted under this rule is conclusively established unless the court on\nmotion permits withdrawal or amendment of the admission.”) (emphasis added). Even though all\nliability issues are established in Complainant’s favor, some of the responses to the interrogatories\nand document production requests still may be useful for the penalty issue. If Complainant believes\nthat any responses to the interrogatories and requests for production of documents are incomplete\nor nonresponsive, it retains the right to file a motion to compel. \nE.Complainant’s Motion to Substitute Counsel\nComplainant filed a motion to substitute counsel, along with a notice of appearance for INS\nAssistant District Counsel Paul Szeto, on May 27, 1998. Complainant stated that INS District\nAttorney Mimi Tsankov, who had been handling the case, no longer worked for the INS. Subst.\nMot. at 1. I noted in my May 29 Order Staying Proceeding that Respondents were entitled to file a\nresponse to the substitution motion on or before June 11, 1998. To date, Respondents have not filed\nsuch a response. Because Complainant’s request is reasonable, and because Respondents have\noffered no objection, Complainant’s Motion to substitute counsel is GRANTED. All further\ndocuments in this case will be served on Mr. Szeto as listed in the attached certificate of service. \nV.CONCLUSION\nRespondents have admitted all the matters contained in Complainant’s Request for\nAdmissions by virtue of the fact that they failed to respond to the Request in a timely manner. For\nthe reasons stated previously in this Order, I will not permit Respondents to withdraw and to amend\nthose admissions. Complainant’s Motion for Summary Decision is GRANTED with respect to\nliability as to both Respondents, but DENIED with respect to penalty. Complainant’s Motion to\nCompel is DENIED as moot. Complainant’s motion to substitute counsel is GRANTED.\nThe only remaining issues in this case are the penalties to be assessed. No later than July 20,\n1998, the parties shall file21 either a joint or separate pleadings proposing procedural dates for the\nremainder of this case. Specifically, the parties shall state whether, as to remaining penalty issues,\nthey waive an evidentiary hearing on penalty and wish to submit documentary evidence and briefs.\nIf a party wishes to present oral testimony on penalty, then, not later than July 20, 1998, it shall file\na witness list. The witness list shall state the name, address (including city and state), title (if\napplicable) and business telephone number of each witness; shall describe the subject matter of the\ntestimony and the specific issues on which the witness will testify; shall state the exhibits, if any, that\nshall be offered through each witness; and shall state for each witness the approximate amount 8 OCAHO 1003 24\nof time needed for the direct examination of the witness. Any modifications to the witness list shall\nnot be made later than thirty days before the start of hearing unless good cause is shown and specific\npermission to do so is granted by the judge.\nIf a party seeks an evidentiary hearing, it also shall state approximately how much time it\nbelieves would be needed for the hearing, and it shall propose several dates for the hearing. If a\nhearing takes place, it will be conducted where the parties are located, in the New York area. If a\nparty prefers to submit the penalty issue on briefs, it shall propose a briefing schedule. The stay of\nproceeding, entered by Order of May 29, 1998, hereby is lifted.\n___________________________________\nROBERT L. BARTON, JR.\nADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE" }

[ -0.025833241641521454, 0.05864046514034271, -0.021348072215914726, 0.032460421323776245, 0.10364080220460892, 0.00981150846928358, 0.020654873922467232, 0.014504439197480679, -0.037497784942388535, 0.12493016570806503, 0.06495394557714462, -0.02121482789516449, -0.008765953592956066, -0.004478836432099342, -0.024678584188222885, 0.04047909751534462, 0.07916359603404999, -0.005602713208645582, -0.060087643563747406, 0.06720487028360367, 0.05168760567903519, 0.010746058076620102, 0.0032225989270955324, -0.017867978662252426, -0.09394209831953049, 0.08212149143218994, 0.030571119859814644, 0.04595258831977844, -0.09334144741296768, -0.0856969952583313, 0.101735420525074, -0.06206183508038521, 0.018314795568585396, 0.034972451627254486, 0.058642465621232986, 0.012102910317480564, 0.14403879642486572, 0.014232495799660683, 0.036913976073265076, -0.018444504588842392, -0.027933893725275993, -0.05003470554947853, 0.04655164107680321, 0.004844417795538902, 0.005288108717650175, -0.05470765009522438, -0.015109171159565449, -0.03178571164608002, -0.022779198363423347, -0.02651272527873516, 0.010982811450958252, -0.027375271543860435, -0.027553897351026535, 0.05478435754776001, -0.0031419075094163418, -0.12192127853631973, 0.026788396760821342, 0.07906253635883331, -0.03516344353556633, -0.019736548885703087, -0.08099234849214554, 0.020899709314107895, -0.026894619688391685, -0.002780618378892541, 0.01987600512802601, 0.021823151037096977, -0.006266627460718155, -0.0017934110946953297, 0.10746832191944122, -0.06111328303813934, 0.0217306986451149, 0.0017284209607169032, 0.02348829247057438, 0.03904913365840912, -0.036991141736507416, 0.07158076018095016, 0.06782132387161255, 0.07153569906949997, 0.02977645955979824, 0.059260059148073196, 0.07628718763589859, -0.018656248226761818, -0.00250084325671196, -0.027354834601283073, -0.010378116741776466, 0.020955286920070648, -0.10088858008384705, 0.06572027504444122, 0.03362290561199188, 0.06783296912908554, 0.06669584661722183, 0.0007600936805829406, 0.028824100270867348, -0.0021217342000454664, 0.07537535578012466, -0.03691462427377701, -0.09195255488157272, -0.02598017454147339, -0.035769570618867874, 0.02481231838464737, -0.02983616106212139, 0.049230076372623444, -0.08468905091285706, -0.029513616114854813, -0.017088668420910835, -0.010742324404418468, -0.010210031643509865, -0.03252071887254715, 0.00011186871415702626, -0.023490004241466522, 0.03692689165472984, -0.006159875076264143, -0.04436666890978813, -0.09890980273485184, 0.05922158434987068, 0.008221747353672981, -0.10900536924600601, 0.08006855845451355, 0.058356739580631256, -0.02394810877740383, -0.009563454426825047, 0.0055520180612802505, -0.03108048252761364, -0.057251766324043274, 0.024388495832681656, -0.027044467628002167, -0.07492037862539291, 3.9816642198060074e-33, 0.012996113859117031, 0.06684235483407974, -0.025176770985126495, -0.015066160820424557, 0.0034424159675836563, -0.03184032440185547, -0.06762401759624481, -0.0296634454280138, 0.057934947311878204, -0.00500062620267272, -0.018385764211416245, 0.04190559312701225, 0.03360754996538162, -0.013512679375708103, 0.01328203547745943, -0.026721127331256866, 0.03528396040201187, 0.0144876753911376, -0.04784810543060303, -0.0025092761497944593, -0.0508720725774765, -0.12238417565822601, -0.004207888152450323, -0.03022914193570614, 0.01625116914510727, 0.10380350798368454, 0.011826870031654835, 0.04809509590268135, 0.07026460021734238, 0.05556485801935196, -0.04444631189107895, 0.12417317181825638, -0.011142168194055557, -0.021668056026101112, 0.043661195784807205, 0.0017504303250461817, -0.0599726065993309, -0.006423947401344776, -0.011668318882584572, -0.11846879124641418, -0.07942354679107666, 0.009824364446103573, 0.012128966860473156, 0.07131978124380112, 0.003686086041852832, -0.10981994867324829, -0.019954925402998924, -0.05535586178302765, 0.09865627437829971, -0.01854272559285164, 0.023026298731565475, -0.059958018362522125, -0.010581083595752716, -0.0535002164542675, -0.04899147152900696, 0.043415285646915436, -0.031925834715366364, 0.0292110163718462, 0.06458423286676407, 0.009066585451364517, 0.021240651607513428, 0.09396513551473618, -0.04968293383717537, 0.03233339637517929, 0.052341822534799576, -0.09129679948091507, -0.02167195826768875, -0.004552814643830061, 0.12482568621635437, 0.013312731869518757, 0.0011911533074453473, 0.057461198419332504, 0.0793309435248375, -0.015316025353968143, -0.09439454972743988, -0.060626935213804245, 0.05165969580411911, 0.03864993155002594, 0.019196001812815666, 0.02597770281136036, 0.021015912294387817, -0.05666679888963699, -0.01011393778026104, -0.04559515789151192, 0.01665359176695347, 0.051237381994724274, -0.013980582356452942, 0.020515937358140945, -0.006666573695838451, 0.07126644998788834, 0.0024862519931048155, -0.05202022194862366, -0.03581630066037178, 0.07294952869415283, -0.05942365154623985, -4.259680021377002e-33, 0.07250630110502243, -0.01838645152747631, -0.09926269203424454, -0.014339594170451164, -0.02929704822599888, -0.0002488637692295015, 0.05030085891485214, -0.04543490335345268, -0.009365392848849297, 0.03560454770922661, -0.06034773588180542, -0.07226812094449997, 0.03330139070749283, 0.032618697732686996, 0.0913185179233551, -0.09330008178949356, 0.01882426254451275, 0.0011708324309438467, -0.027088500559329987, 0.00143257318995893, 0.04358263313770294, 0.015948573127388954, -0.04852089285850525, -0.003418220905587077, 0.01492919959127903, 0.009177620522677898, -0.0024087547790259123, -0.021112633869051933, -0.022710252553224564, -0.019495569169521332, 0.014632994309067726, -0.015036436729133129, -0.02589254453778267, 0.06449277698993683, -0.07637444138526917, 0.009725752286612988, 0.08768035471439362, -0.032368555665016174, 0.00992540828883648, -0.023361122235655785, 0.05713913217186928, 0.10980617254972458, -0.05217378959059715, -0.011397340334951878, -0.01969892345368862, 0.027777032926678658, 0.03615536168217659, 0.12188500910997391, 0.03495701029896736, -0.024902209639549255, -0.04964359477162361, 0.0036588055081665516, -0.10171102732419968, 0.021151050925254822, 0.0345834419131279, -0.01766252890229225, -0.024986637756228447, -0.12477663904428482, -0.08437875658273697, 0.014339660294353962, 0.02171979285776615, 0.071834996342659, -0.03668238967657089, 0.03409554436802864, 0.049802016466856, -0.041763320565223694, -0.033598918467760086, -0.06582346558570862, -0.014866630546748638, 0.04872030392289162, 0.029568666592240334, -0.036290787160396576, -0.030522974207997322, -0.08289261907339096, 0.006098099984228611, -0.061350636184215546, -0.07236818969249725, -0.00672869710251689, -0.1192886084318161, 0.01845456473529339, 0.028963087126612663, -0.030136842280626297, -0.1174517348408699, 0.1427796334028244, 0.030904578045010567, 0.05599556863307953, 0.060963697731494904, 0.0034826321061700583, 0.009081076830625534, 0.014146996662020683, -0.09799597412347794, -0.0031744425650686026, 0.0008060401887632906, 0.09039346873760223, -0.07735484093427658, -5.020982385417483e-8, 0.0076259830966591835, -0.006321399472653866, 0.001015960704535246, 0.014043199829757214, 0.00982347410172224, 0.0029679196886718273, -0.03670313209295273, -0.03552816063165665, -0.018979717046022415, -0.028290865942835808, 0.027951033785939217, -0.0015445989556610584, -0.04053584858775139, -0.011303074657917023, -0.00711938738822937, -0.038194335997104645, 0.08194886893033981, -0.021957773715257645, -0.032682664692401886, -0.0004209158068988472, 0.024822287261486053, -0.057159096002578735, -0.023710153996944427, 0.06768383830785751, -0.0007068960694596171, 0.06381946802139282, -0.048297982662916183, 0.07981487363576889, -0.015611788257956505, 0.0928029790520668, -0.07099419087171555, -0.019525915384292603, -0.018971949815750122, -0.016012581065297127, -0.050917524844408035, 0.011344213038682938, 0.07882742583751678, -0.03364413231611252, 0.021041421219706535, -0.014005091041326523, -0.03339112177491188, -0.043194644153118134, 0.04876307398080826, 0.06094910949468613, 0.03944482281804085, 0.037278980016708374, -0.06630732864141464, -0.016347425058484077, -0.05599566176533699, -0.023181011900305748, -0.04799472168087959, -0.08657124638557434, -0.03389992192387581, 0.09910140931606293, 0.012242209166288376, 0.06389078497886658, 0.07013346999883652, -0.05214545503258705, 0.029622988775372505, 0.01192441675812006, 0.1355820745229721, -0.00221174000762403, -0.020396417006850243, 0.011341221630573273 ]

{ "pdf_file": "AA7LE5CV3O4PNQJPJXH2W6ML2O44A2ET.pdf", "text": "Executive Office of Public Sa fety Newsletter, June 2006 \n The Executive Office of Public Safety (EOPS) is committed to keeping \nthe people of Massachusetts informed about critical homeland security, \nemergency management, pe rsonal safety, and criminal justice issues. \nThe EOPS newsletter is published m onthly for the purpose of sharing \ncurrent information on events, publications, and funding opportunities \namong public safety professionals. \n \n 1 \n EOPS Announcements \n \n \nIncident Response to Terrorist Bombings and Prevention and Response to \nSuicide Bombings Awareness Course \nJuly 25 and July 26, 2006 in Quincy, MA \nThe Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA), in Partnership \nwith MBTA Transit Police, are presenting a training to provide participants with \nbasic information concerning explosive and incendiary devi ces that could be used \nas terrorist weapons. This course is designed for Emergency Responders \nincluding: Fire, Police, EMS, Emergency Management Personnel, Public Works, Contents \n \n Funding Opportunities \n• The College Environmental \nAlcohol Prevention Planning and \nImplementation Grant (EOPS) \n• Juvenile Justice and Delinquency \nPrevention Act Formula Grant \nProgram (EOPS) \n• Field-Initiated Research and \nEvaluation Program (OJJDP) \n• Social Science Research on the Role and Impact of Forensic \nEvidence on the Criminal Justice Process (NIJ) \n \nResearch and Publications \n• Characteristics of Drivers \n Stopped by Police (BJS) \n• Synthetic Drug Control Strategy \n(ONDCP) \n• Prison and Jail Inmates at \nMidyear 2005 (BJS) \n Highlights of the 2004 National Public Health, or any emergency responder who is likely to be called upon a \nscene that involves energetic materials (W MD). The goal of this course is to \nprovide participants with the ability to conduct pre-attack analysis and planning, \nprior to a suicide bombing incident. Tr aining registration form and contact \ninformation is attached. •\n• \nSherriff’s Offices, 2003 (BJS) \n• \ns \n• T. Officer Training \nJ) \n) \n 2006 National Community \nference (COPS) \n \n \ninals \n Boston Tests Electronic Crime \nAlert System For Public \n Youth Gang Survey (OJJDP) \nLocal Police Departments and \n \nConferences and Trainings \nIncident Response to Terrorist \nBombings and Prevention and \nResponse to Suicide Bombing\nAwareness Course (MEMA) \nG.R.E.A.\n(EOPS) \n• Terrorism Symposium (NIJ) \n• DNA Grantees Workshop (NI\n• Managing Juvenile Services \n(OJJDP) \n• Criminal Intelligence Systems \nTraining (BJA) \n• The 2006 NIJ Conference (NIJ\n•\nPolicing Con\n \nIn the News \n• Boston's New Problem: Stop Emerging Girl Gang \"Epidemic\"\n• Boston Plans 24/7 SurveillanceOf Hard-Core Crim\n• Boston Officials Launch Gun Buyback Program \n• \nSurvey for the Violence Against Women Act STOP Grant Program \nTo help the Executive Office of Public Sa fety (EOPS) and the Violence Against \nWomen Act (VAWA) Advisory Committee de velop their Three Year Strategic \nPlan for the Massachusetts Violence Ag ainst Women Act STOP (Services, \nTraining, Officers, Prosecut ors) Grant Program, the EOPS is administering a \nsurvey to members of the criminal justic e, court, local/state government, and \nvictim advocate/victim services commun ities. The survey seeks respondents' \nviews on the criminal justice system’s re sponse to crimes of sexual assault, \ndomestic violence, and stalking in Ma ssachusetts, in a number of areas \nincluding: the needs of victims of crimes against women, VAWA program \npurpose areas, and underserved populations. Th e EOPS is particularly interested \nin the professional opinions of front-line staff. The survey takes approximately \n15-20 minutes to complete. \nContact Diane DeAngelis at diane.deangelis@state.ma.us or (617) 725-3362 \nwith any questions or comments. \n \nAny individual wishing to complete the survey should enter the following link \ninto their web browser: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=40952223277\n \n 2Notice on Toyobo Class Action Settle ment regarding Zylon Bulletproof \nVests \nPlease note there is another limite d opportunity for anyone with a Second Chance vest to participate in \nthe Toyobo Class Action Settlement. Toyobo is the exclusive manufacturer of Zylon. Anyone (or \ndepartment) that had purchased a Second Chance Ultima, Ultimax, or Triflex vest may submit a late \nclaim no later than JULY 1, 2006 . For the purpose of this class action settlement, it makes no \ndifference if you have already received a warranty replacement vest or any other remedy offered by Second Chance or its agents. Any Second Chance consumer is eligible. \nTo obtain the registration forms, either vis it www.zylonvestclassaction.com or call 1-877-567-2754. \n \n \nEOPS Funding Opportunities \n \nThe College Environmental Alcohol Prevention Planning and \nImplementation Grant \nApplication Deadline: June 23, 2006 \nThe Governor’s Highway Safety Bureau (GHSB), a program of the Executive \nOffice of Public Safety, announces the availability of approximately $200,000 \nin grant funding for Massachusetts colleges and universities with undergraduate \nenrollment of 5,000 or less. Colleges and universities will develop and implement \nan environmentally focused plan to pr event alcohol use and abuse. Proposed \nprograms should focus on limiting access to alcohol, expressing community norms, or programming \naimed specifically at impaired driving. \nFor more information: http://www.mass.gov/eopsfunding.htm click on Justice and Education \n \nJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Formula Grant Program \nBidders’ Conference: June 22, 2006 in Worcester, MA \nApplication Deadline: July 20, 2006 \nEOPS is making approximately $885,000 of funding available from the federal Juvenile Justice and \nDelinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) Formula Gran t Program, subject to the final award to \nMassachusetts through the U.S. Depart ment of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile \nJustice and Delinquency Prevention. The purpose of this program is to improve the lives of juveniles in \nthe Commonwealth by preventing thei r involvement with the juvenile justice system and by improving \nthe operation and services provided by the juvenile justice system. A bi dders’ conference will be held \non Thursday, June 22 from 1:00-4:00 pm at the Crowne Plaza in Worcester, Massachusetts. \nFor more information: http://www.mass.gov/eopsfunding.htm click on Justice and Education \n \n \nOther Funding Opportunities \n \nField-Initiated Research and Evaluation Program \nApplication Deadline: June 19, 2006 \n“The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Pr evention is looking for applicants for the Field-\nInitiated Research and Evaluation Program. The goal of the program is to fo ster original, rigorous, \nscientific research and evaluation studies using traditional or innovative methods to inform the \ndisciplines of juvenile justic e and delinquency prevention and child maltreatment prevention and \nintervention.” \nFor more information: http://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/grants/s olicitations/2006fire.pdf \n 3Social Science Research on the Role and Impact of Forensic Evidence on the Criminal Justice \nProcess \nApplication Deadline: June 20, 2006 \n“The National Institute of Justice is seeking proposal s for social science research that evaluates the use \nof forensic evidence in the criminal justice syst em through the collection, an alysis, and subsequent \ninvestigative and adjudicative processes. Findings from this study could influence policies on such \nissues as the allocation of resources and the training of laboratory and crime scene personnel.” \nFor more information: http:/ /www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/SL000748.pdf \n \n \nResearch and Publications \n \nCharacteristics of Drivers Stopped by Police \nThe Bureau of Justice Statistics recently released this report detailing the nature and characteristics of \ntraffic stops, as collected by the 2002 Police Public Contact Survey, a supp lement to the National \nCrime Victimization Survey. Demographic info rmation is presented on the 16.8 million drivers \nstopped by police in 2002, as well as information on th e various outcomes of traffic stops, including: \nsearches conducted by police, tickets issued to dr ivers stopped for speeding, arrests of stopped drivers, \nand police use of force during a traffic stop. \nAccess full text at: http://www .ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cdsp02.htm \n \nSynthetic Drug Control Strategy: A Focus on Methamphetamine and Prescription Drug Abuse \nThe Office of National Drug Control Policy presents the Administration' s strategy for responding to \nthe illicit use and production of methamphetamine, and the illic it use of controlled substance \nprescription drugs. The publication includes a progress report and a detailed descrip tion of current \ngoals to reduce production and use. \nAccess full text at: http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/pub lications/synthetic_drg_control_ \nstrat/index.html \n \nPrison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2005 \nThe Bureau of Justice Statistics is presenting data on prison and jail inmates, collected from National \nPrisoner Statistics counts and the Census of Jail Inmates 2005. This midyear repo rt contains statistics \non the number of prison inmates held in private facilities and the numbe r of prisoners under 18 years of \nage held by State correctional aut horities. Numbers of prison and ja il inmates by gender, race, and \nHispanic origin as well as counts of jail inmates by conviction status and conf inement status are also \nincluded. \nAccess full text at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/pjim05.htm \n \nHighlights of the 2004 National Youth Gang Survey \nThis recently released Office of Juvenile Just ice and Delinquency Prevention report provides an \noverview of findings from the 2004 National Youth Gang Surve y, the tenth annual survey conducted \nby the National Youth Gang Center. Data is provided to shed light on youth ga ng activity in the United \nStates and includes the number of gangs, gang members, and gang-related homicides in larger cities, \nsuburban counties, smaller cities, and rural counties. \nAccess full text at: http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs. org/publications/PubA bstract.asp?pubi=235570 \n \n \n \n 4Local Police Departments a nd Sherriff’s Offices, 2003 \nThe Bureau of Justice Statistics recently released two reports usi ng data collected from the 2003 Law \nEnforcement Management and Administrative Statis tics (LEMAS) survey. Data is collected from a \nrepresentative sample of local police departments a nd sheriff’s offices nationw ide and detail a variety \nof agency characteristic. The sheriff’s office report includes national estimates for sheriffs' offices on \nstaff and financial resources, technologies and equi pment in use, and agency policies and practices \ncovering a wide variety of law en forcement and administrative concerns. The law enforcement report \nalso includes national estimates for local police de partments on issues incl uding staff and financial \nresources, technologies and equipment in use, and policies and practices of the agencies. \nAccess full text at: http:/ /www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/whtsnw2.htm \n \n \nConferences and Trainings \n \nG.R.E.A.T. Officer Training: Gang Resistance Education and Training \nThe Executive Office of Public Safety is currently soliciting interest in G.R.E.A.T. (Gang Resistance \nEducation and Training) Officer Tr aining. If enough officers are interested, the training will take place \nduring the last two weeks of August, 2006. Either 1-week or 2-week training will be offered to \ncertified/sworn, uniformed law enforcement officers with a minimum of one ye ar of experience and \nwho agree to teach the G.R.E. A.T. curriculum in uniform. \nFor more information: http://www.mass.gov/eops click in key initiative module \n \nTerrorism Symposium \nJune 12-13, 2006 in Denver, CO \nThe National Institute of Justice is hosting this event for law enforcement officials who deal with \nterrorism in their states, cities, and communities. Panelists will share research findings and state and local officials will be invited to describe their challenges and experiences in interactive sessions. \nTopics will include: how to identify warning sign s, what local prosecutors are doing to combat \nterrorism, ways to improve cooperation between law enforcement and Arab communities, securing shopping malls and seaports, and money laundering. \nFor more information: http://www.oj p.usdoj.gov/nij/events/register_ts.html \n \nDNA Grantees Workshop \nJune 26-28, 2006 in Arlington, VA \nThe National Institute of Justice is announcing this DNA grantee wo rkshop as a forum for discussion \non the current and future needs of public crime laboratories and how new technological innovations \ncan help meet those needs. The workshop will also give researchers the opportunity to provide project updates, practitioners to discuss ca sework issues and concerns, and fo r researchers and practitioners to \nwork in partnership. \nFor more information: http:// www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/events/welcome.html \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n 5Managing Juvenile Services \nVarious dates and locations listed below \nThe Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is sponsoring the following \ntraining sessions on managi ng juvenile services: \n• Hartford, CT, June 26-30, 2006 \n• Spokane, WA, August 7-11, 2006 • Kansas City, MO, September 18-22, 2006 • Rochester, NY, October 23-27, 2006 \nThis program will present management concepts to build leadership capacity and organizational competency in the planning and delivery of juvenile services. Tuition, student materials, instructional \ncosts, and single-occupancy lodging will be provided by OJJDP. The participant is responsible for transportation, meals, an d incidental expenses. \nFor more information: http://dept. fvtc.edu/ojjdp/descriptions.htm#mjs \n \nCriminal Intelligence Systems Training \nJuly 13, 2006 in Franklin, MA \nThe Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) is offeri ng a training, co-hosted by NESPIN, on the guidelines \ngoverning the operation of federally funded criminal intelligence sy stems. The training includes \ninformation on the following topics: training overvie w and resources, 28 Code of Federal Regulations \nPart 23, complying with the regula tion, storing criminal intelligence, inquiry and dissemination, and \nreview and purge. There is no registration fee but the class size is limited. \nFor more information: http://www.iir.com/28cfr/Franklin.htm \n \nThe 2006 NIJ Conference \nJuly 17-19, 2006 in Washington, DC \nThe National Institute of Justice Conference (forma lly called the Research and Evaluation Conference) \nspotlights what works, what doesn't work, and what the research shows as promising. Developments in \ntechnology that increases public safety will be featur ed. Researchers interested in criminal justice, \npolicymakers responsible for shaping public safety or social services, practitione rs in criminal justice \nand students interested in criminal justice issues are invited to attend. \nFor more information: http://www.oj p.usdoj.gov/nij/events/nij_conference2006.html \n \n2006 National Community Policing Conference - Community Policing: Leading the Way to a \nSafer Nation \nJuly 27-29, 2006 in Washington, DC \nThis Office of Community Orie nted Policing Services (COPS) conference will feature more than \n48 workshops grouped into seven subj ect tracks offering leadership strategies: Leading in Change, \nLeading in Innovation, Leading in Crisis, Leading in Integrity, Leading in Science and Technology, \nAhead of the Curve, and Contemporary Issues in Community Policing. Command and patrol-level \nlaw enforcement personnel, state and local governm ent executives, criminal justice professionals, \neducators, community leaders, and others interest ed in the implementation and future direction of \ncommunity policing are invited to attend. \nFor more information: http:// www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=1044 \n \n \n \n 6In The News \n \nBoston's New Problem: Stop Emerging Girl Gang \"Epidemic\" \nBoston Herald , May 12, 2006 \nAccording to the Boston Herald , Boston Mayor Thomas Menino is or dering new steps to stop the \nviolence between gangs of young girls, including the addition of female police detectives to a special \nunit. The rise in violent crimes committed by teenage girls who associate or travel in loosely organized \ngroups prompted Commissioner Kathleen O’Toole to as k for more female cops in the Youth Violence \nStrike Force. Teen girls were i nvolved in at least four incidents of armed violence during the second \nweek of May. \nAccess full text at: http://news.bostonher ald.com/localRegional/v iew.bg?articleid=138947 \n \nBoston Plans 24/7 Surveillance Of Hard-Core Criminals \nBoston Globe , May 16, 2006 \nAccording to a recent Boston Globe article, Boston police will increa se twenty-four hour surveillance \nof dozens of hard-core criminals on the city's streets to help curb violence in what is feared to be a \nparticularly bloody summer. The new tracking program, referred inside the department as ''A Day in \nthe Life,\" calls for monitoring the criminals who are believed to be la rgely responsible for the shocking \nincrease in gun violence. \nAccess full text at: http://www.boston.com/news /local/massachusetts/art icles/2006/05/16/police_ \nplanning_tight_surveillance_of_worst_criminals/ \n \nBoston Officials Launch Gun Buyback Program \nBoston Globe , May 30, 2006 \nThe Boston Globe indicated that City and police official s, and community leaders have recently \nannounced that a gun buyback program is restarting in Boston. About $40,000 has been raised for the \nprogram, which details that people who turn in guns will be given $200 in Target gift cards. Gift cards \nwill be used instead of cash because criminologist s have found that in previous buyback programs, \ncertain individuals used the buyback money to purchase newer guns. \nAccess full text at: http://www.boston.com/ news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2006/05/ \nboston_official.html \n \nBoston Tests Electronic Crime Alert System For Public \nBoston Globe , June 2, 2006 \nBoston is starting a crime alert system that will notify resident s when crimes occur in their \nneighborhoods, reports the Boston Globe. The system will disseminate crucial information about \ncrimes through text messages, e-mails, and faxes to Boston residents. The program will initially be \ntested in three police districts, Dorchester, So uth Boston, and Roxbury, and c ould expand to cover the \nrest of the city later this year. \nAccess full text at: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massac husetts/articles/2006/06/02/city_police_ \nto_send_residents_electronic_crime_alerts/ \n \nContact Information \n \nWe welcome and encourage your comments. Pleas e email us at: EOPS.newsletter@state.ma.us \nSubscription details: \nTo subscribe to this newsletter send an email to: join-eopsnewsle tter@listserv.state.ma.us \nTo unsubscribe to this newsletter send an email to: leave-eopsnewsletter@listserv.state.ma.us \nFor additional information on EOPS’ grant progr ams or agencies please visit: www.mass.gov/eops " }

[ 0.0432710163295269, -0.04577871039509773, 0.022552628070116043, 0.025975776836276054, 0.0006131305708549917, 0.03884834423661232, -0.12107451260089874, 0.021535765379667282, -0.08320969343185425, 0.054135654121637344, 0.08955030888319016, -0.11202432960271835, -0.08319850265979767, 0.03559843450784683, 0.01355229876935482, 0.05059225112199783, 0.06664633005857468, -0.05398998409509659, 0.012059906497597694, 0.012207013554871082, 0.0901857540011406, 0.03373655304312706, -0.09354573488235474, 0.025750024244189262, -0.07887458056211472, -0.04276149347424507, -0.14540605247020721, 0.05381489917635918, 0.017551925033330917, -0.01130441203713417, 0.010821687057614326, 0.06969033181667328, 0.0026946633588522673, -0.04141383245587349, 0.025582903996109962, -0.03653612360358238, 0.027888694778084755, -0.061537548899650574, 0.03683486953377724, 0.040599774569272995, 0.04753825441002846, -0.012652729637920856, 0.00682449946179986, -0.0056102159433066845, -0.02252883091568947, -0.00227660546079278, -0.039452437311410904, 0.06481360644102097, 0.02090991847217083, 0.01594841480255127, 0.05472685024142265, -0.03483304753899574, -0.014792569912970066, 0.027763785794377327, -0.04553128033876419, 0.015858836472034454, 0.059619080275297165, 0.03815443068742752, 0.0724213570356369, -0.05496985465288162, -0.049677688628435135, -0.0006588735268451273, -0.05714298412203789, 0.011085255071520805, 0.04274902120232582, -0.07093265652656555, -0.08154726773500443, -0.027375750243663788, 0.022725233808159828, 0.014179712161421776, -0.038245853036642075, -0.09045295417308807, -0.03157033026218414, -0.010045647621154785, -0.019566243514418602, 0.1106853112578392, 0.004463291261345148, 0.05733036622405052, 0.10694973915815353, -0.1334470957517624, -0.037210747599601746, -0.027100713923573494, 0.03958265483379364, -0.05066798999905586, 0.059059616178274155, -0.05624106898903847, -0.03634324297308922, 0.06000279635190964, 0.07814528048038483, -0.05244417116045952, 0.09537976235151291, -0.036362167447805405, -0.04553411528468132, -0.020887840539216995, -0.02737235464155674, -0.0036254050210118294, 0.013810785487294197, -0.048154961317777634, -0.03707004338502884, 0.014187010936439037, -0.003756179939955473, -0.03153836727142334, -0.027666686102747917, -0.02372574992477894, -0.005747055634856224, -0.02143067680299282, -0.08167148381471634, 0.07551444321870804, 0.004717889241874218, 0.038826338946819305, -0.03357808291912079, 0.04563413932919502, -0.012765376828610897, -0.005415977910161018, -0.018236447125673294, 0.053398970514535904, -0.04337911680340767, -0.04303126409649849, -0.005590254440903664, -0.043790172785520554, -0.05857936292886734, -0.029258141294121742, -0.0052600218914449215, -0.007632371503859758, 0.06507360935211182, -0.04496418684720993, 0.043975554406642914, 6.245815847677478e-33, 0.03522586449980736, -0.04639309644699097, -0.00689998734742403, -0.10580029338598251, 0.04304707795381546, -0.06733005493879318, 0.020539050921797752, 0.01849617250263691, 0.02083691395819187, -0.013771255500614643, 0.0694844126701355, 0.027536911889910698, -0.008235831744968891, -0.09962481260299683, 0.025782577693462372, -0.08155054599046707, 0.0031333379447460175, -0.00979250855743885, 0.036183521151542664, 0.02500477246940136, 0.029839882627129555, -0.08707037568092346, -0.030145667493343353, 0.022284746170043945, -0.011874226853251457, -0.02247011289000511, 0.016670996323227882, -0.04144589975476265, -0.07112529128789902, 0.06786708533763885, 0.058432865887880325, -0.00009097750444198027, 0.0058471811935305595, -0.04072341322898865, -0.01260225847363472, -0.0012425875756889582, 0.013892284594476223, -0.050306711345911026, -0.06816549599170685, -0.01663937419652939, 0.05566827952861786, -0.03867292031645775, 0.03774871304631233, -0.023522263392806053, 0.011503126472234726, -0.06017545610666275, 0.0560833215713501, 0.04496988281607628, 0.04769141599535942, 0.09994816035032272, -0.03940523415803909, -0.049599986523389816, -0.04242286458611488, 0.013235867954790592, 0.011555170640349388, 0.016959238797426224, -0.005631288979202509, -0.04667455330491066, -0.03444762900471687, -0.07302495837211609, 0.09632416069507599, -0.037534136325120926, -0.015634559094905853, -0.05239132046699524, -0.03452116250991821, -0.06417307257652283, 0.01514903549104929, 0.0000106614224932855, 0.010240638628602028, 0.005721391644328833, 0.008637461811304092, -0.013485085219144821, 0.05265754461288452, 0.02081272192299366, 0.054534997791051865, -0.019832497462630272, 0.08514661341905594, 0.15066570043563843, 0.006205283105373383, 0.03777727484703064, 0.002204372314736247, 0.07407024502754211, -0.03869927302002907, 0.014762216247618198, 0.0696471631526947, -0.07906120270490646, 0.026129422709345818, 0.07221626490354538, -0.04499521851539612, -0.025636767968535423, 0.10038764774799347, 0.016932247206568718, -0.025637241080403328, 0.03492583706974983, 0.02544897049665451, -5.813781266131978e-33, -0.008244900032877922, 0.043331924825906754, 0.03631903976202011, 0.06003695726394653, -0.027098366990685463, 0.03367292508482933, 0.02566542848944664, 0.01403616089373827, 0.0626714676618576, -0.0436149537563324, -0.04867517575621605, 0.05770130828022957, 0.062460094690322876, -0.01946665346622467, -0.04874437674880028, -0.0005923085263930261, -0.024710770696401596, 0.004196720197796822, 0.03585292398929596, -0.021539699286222458, -0.007381848059594631, 0.013996406458318233, -0.01394433993846178, 0.013298473320901394, 0.02102767676115036, 0.011399971321225166, -0.07128197699785233, 0.058364711701869965, -0.027869954705238342, 0.004091959912329912, -0.012708008289337158, -0.05587054416537285, -0.027091272175312042, 0.00861496850848198, -0.09797747433185577, -0.08281278610229492, -0.01537181157618761, 0.10897206515073776, -0.019552094861865044, 0.10866148769855499, 0.0590287521481514, -0.008272881619632244, -0.020962050184607506, 0.04302959144115448, -0.017511432990431786, -0.061788998544216156, 0.05221204832196236, -0.0690082237124443, 0.02149813249707222, 0.07964231818914413, 0.02487374097108841, 0.009211358614265919, -0.02330203913152218, 0.01834958791732788, -0.039939139038324356, 0.08268731087446213, 0.07285044342279434, 0.013356775045394897, -0.14357979595661163, -0.004583528731018305, 0.03702007979154587, 0.13233919441699982, -0.020416511222720146, 0.00035664168535731733, 0.02014152891933918, 0.019125834107398987, -0.00479873875156045, -0.05348765850067139, 0.07586278766393661, -0.04082634672522545, -0.08685075491666794, -0.02356448769569397, -0.02507948689162731, -0.05542955920100212, 0.04852790758013725, -0.016258668154478073, 0.05310468375682831, -0.07497293502092361, -0.023598289117217064, 0.006453235633671284, -0.11569575220346451, 0.05057824030518532, 0.01184187363833189, 0.059111203998327255, 0.0308370403945446, -0.010838744230568409, -0.06896314769983292, -0.044067736715078354, 0.06715437769889832, 0.059295035898685455, -0.020592473447322845, 0.02587543986737728, -0.01438335794955492, 0.04402051866054535, 0.033491041511297226, -5.1610747675567836e-8, -0.014638040214776993, 0.08660554885864258, 0.04039761424064636, 0.09695771336555481, 0.11786491423845291, 0.006172446068376303, 0.03025786392390728, -0.08827058970928192, -0.02418852038681507, 0.05599070340394974, 0.04879346862435341, -0.004776680842041969, 0.0051877847872674465, -0.006637600250542164, 0.019427254796028137, -0.015189112164080143, 0.04420984536409378, -0.011630014516413212, -0.09427697956562042, 0.023539850488305092, -0.08828499168157578, -0.07925687730312347, 0.06404389441013336, 0.038328658789396286, 0.02937522530555725, -0.0244650486856699, -0.036313340067863464, 0.11273027211427689, 0.019048968330025673, 0.08685719221830368, -0.006987923756241798, 0.03895832225680351, -0.10310813784599304, 0.011358781717717648, -0.12132140249013901, -0.03743680939078331, -0.1311841756105423, 0.01398343313485384, 0.004609698895365, 0.07659181207418442, 0.0025236511137336493, 0.0023748716339468956, 0.005701935384422541, 0.06648252159357071, 0.04688529297709465, 0.052358366549015045, -0.08909580856561661, -0.08462029695510864, 0.0059175570495426655, -0.03913675993680954, -0.031755272299051285, -0.03421979397535324, 0.027185898274183273, 0.03757819905877113, 0.017662566155195236, 0.029774336144328117, 0.0221738088876009, -0.0886312872171402, 0.06730999797582626, 0.021770646795630455, -0.02025645412504673, -0.08062884211540222, -0.009171624667942524, -0.00963964220136404 ]

{ "pdf_file": "KAI53AEUTC4X3GRV6WZDEZUWVEYPTPPU.pdf", "text": "South Wahoo C&H Allotment \n2009 ANNUAL OPERATING PROVISIONS \n \n1. Permitted and Authorized Use \nThe 2009 cost per Head Month will be added to your Bill for Collection when received. The Bill \nwill be sent to you. Payment must be received by the due date listed on the Bill for Collection. \n \nYour permit reads as follows: \n \nPermittee Allotment Term Permit Season AUMs \nRobert C. Weed (#61285) South Wahoo \n(#219) \n 350 c/c 09/1-12/15 1,610 \n Upon payment of fees, you are au thorized to graze as follows: \n \n Allotment Authorized Season AUMS \n \nSouth Wahoo \n 400 c/c 11/1-1/31 1,597 \n Actual on-dates\n and off-dates are dependant on range readiness and when allowable use standards \nare met. The Forest Service may approve changes to the grazing rotation in consultation with \nyou, to address range condition and situations that may occur due to forage condition or weather \nrelated circumstances. 2. Grazing Management \n It is strongly suggested that liv estock be moved before utilization standards are met. If allowable \nuse levels are met early in the scheduled pasture, ca ttle will be rotated into the next pasture or off \nthe Forest This should prevent non-compliance of standards, allowing for time to clean the unit of \nstragglers. Monitoring will be conducted to measure utilizatio n of riparian and upland vegetation throughout \nthe grazing year. \n \nThe following illustrates last year’s rotation: \nPASTURE ON OFF NUMBER \nSouth 10/01/2007 12/31/2007 350 \n \nThe following illustrates any changes made during the annual Validation Meeting to the 2009 grazing rotation on the allotment. \nPASTURE ON OFF NUMBER \nNorth 11/01/2008 01/31/2009 400 \n \n1 Cattle are to be completely removed from a pasture by the off date. I will allow you two weeks \nprior to the off date to begin movi ng cattle into the next pasture. If two weeks is not adequate, you \nmust request additional time from this office. Please notify this office when you begin to move \ncattle and when a pasture rotation is complete. Permittees with livestock in rested units, grazing units outside the season of use, and grazing areas not authorized in advance, will be non-complian t with the terms and conditions of their Term \nGrazing Permit. Appropriate acti on, including billing at the unaut horized use rate, may be taken. \n \n3. Gila National Forest Management Direction \n \nYour Term Grazing Permit includes the specific maxi mum allowable utilization levels applicable to \nyour allotment. Allowable use is ca lculated at a point-in-time. To comply with standards in the Gila \nNational Forest Plan, livestock must be moved to another unit or remove th em from National Forest \nSystem lands regardless of the time remaining in the grazing season before utiliz ation standards are met. \n You are responsible for tracking and complying w ith your permitted forage use levels. For your \nconvenience, the South Wahoo C&H Allotment maximum allowable forage utilization levels are listed \nbelow: \nSouth Wahoo C&H Allotment: \n \nThe following utilization standards will be applied on the South Wahoo Allotment: \n \n• Up to 30% allowable use on all key areas. \n \nRange Improvements \nRange improvements must be maintained to stan dard before cattle are allowed into a pasture. It is the \npermittee’s responsibility to ensure that range impr ovements remain functional. This includes boundary \nfences in pastures not currently being grazed. Routine maintenanc e of existing improvements does not \nrequire written clearance; howev er, construction/reconstruction of new improvements must be \nauthorized in writing from this office. \n 2006 Improvement Planned: \n• We apologize that we were unable to comple te the work on the two dirt tanks that we \nbegan last year. At our annual validation meeting we discussed that cleaning out the Bear \nTank would be our first priority for grazing year 2006 and we will try and accomplish that work this spring. Completed  Not Completed  \n \n2009 Improvements Planned (Work or Supplie s Needed from 2006 and New Projects) \n__Bear Tank Possible EQIP Project for 2009 __________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________When improvements have been maintained, please call the Black Range Ranger Station and report that maintenance has been completed. If verification is not received from the permittee, \n2 inspections will be made. During that inspection, if we find maintenance has not been completed, \nand livestock are grazing an area unscheduled for use at the time, they will be considered \nunauthorized. Permittees may be billed for unau thorized use and/or permit action taken for \nmaintenance. \nAll water developments must provide access and escape to and from water for all types of wildlife. \nPlease contact the Kameron or Shane for assistance. \n \n1. Monitoring \n \nKey areas for monitoring are identified as riparian areas and transect cluster locations. Additional key \nareas may be identified during th e season based on routine monitoring. \n \nThe idea of a key area is to find a site that is repr esentative of a larger area in which cattle obtain the \nmajority of their required forage resources. Key ar ea monitoring will avoid areas directly adjacent to \npermanent water sources, cattle tr ails, roads, and fence lines. \n Upland areas will be monitored for use on perennial grass species. District personnel will contact the pe rmittees to coordinate site visits to monitor key areas. Permittee \nparticipation is encouraged. Forage utilization estim ates will be consistent with the Forest Service \nRange Analysis Handbook methodology, and may also incl ude FS Regional stubble-height standards, as \nwell as other techniques generally accepte d in the field of range management. \n \n2. Special Management Instructions \n \nhe following restrictions will be implemented so that management remains in compliance with the \nEndangered Species Act. The instru ctions below relate to threaten ed, endangered, and proposed to be \nlisted species as well as range/watershed conditions. \n \n• There are no documentations that identify any protected and restricted Mexican Spotted Owl \nhabitat on the South Wahoo Allotment, therefore th ere are no restrictions regarding the Mexican \nSpotted Owl. \n• Stock tanks must be surveyed fo r possible aquatic habitat before earth-disturbing maintenance is \nauthorized. \n• The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Chir icahua leopard frog as a threatened species in \n2002. We have completed grazing consultation on your allotment regarding the effects of \nlivestock grazing on the Chiricahua leopard frog . We determined that livestock grazing will \neither have no effect or will not adversely affect the Chiricahua leopard frog. As a result of this \ndetermination, there were no changes required of your grazing permit. The U.S. Fish and \nWildlife Service concurred with this determination. Therefore, consultation has been completed. A copy of this consultation is on file with your local Ranger District. \nThe Endangered Species Act requires that actions f unded or carried out by the federal government go \nthrough the consultation process to insure these actions do not jeopardi ze the continued existence of a \nlisted species. Please notify this office of any planned earth disturbing ac tivities involving riparian \nareas, dirt tanks, or other sources of open water. \n3 \n3. Other Instructions \n \nOn yearlong ranges, calves under six months of age on January 1st will be counted against the \nauthorized numbers. By April 1st, these calves must be removed from the Forest or counted \nagainst the authorized numbers. \n \nThe permittee must obtain permission from this offi ce, before conducting earth - disturbing activities on \nthe National Forest. The Forest Service will arra nge inspections of project areas and will prepare \nappropriate environmental and cultural documents be fore earth-disturbing activities proceed. These \nactivities include road/earthen tank maintenance, as well as construction/reconstruction of trails, roads, \nearthen tanks, etc. Do not conduc t any earth-disturbing ac tivities using heavy e quipment on the Forest \nwithout written clearance from this office. Salt must be located at least ¼ mile from water, a nd preferably on ridges and/or areas of low use. Do \nnot place salt blocks in the same location as the previous year, and locate blocks on hard ground not \nsusceptible to erosion. Supplemental feeding, other th an mineral or supplement block, is not authorized \non the National Forest. Accurate records of your operation will aid in planning and determini ng the effectiveness of the grazing \nsystem. Please maintain reasonably accurate record s of cattle numbers throughout the grazing season. \n \nThe Annual Operating Instructions are a part of the Term Grazing Permit as provided for in Part 1, \nSection 3. These instructions comply with the standards and guidelines found in the Forest Plan, \nincluding the 1996 Forest Plan Amendment. They also comply with the E ndangered Species Act found \nin the Biological Assessment for the South Wahoo Allotment. Any additiona l information collected \nduring the year may be incorporated into the Annual Operating Instructions. \nThese instructions are not subject to ad ministrative review, pursuant to 36 CFR 251. \nYour compliance with these instructions is essent ial for the proper manageme nt of National Forest \nSystem lands. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of your permit and these instructions \nmay result in issuance of a notice of noncompliance with the terms of your grazing permit. If needed \nduring the grazing season, changes can be made in th ese instructions, provided the changes are first \napproved and documented by the District Ranger or other authorized Fo rest Service officer. \n We look forward to working with you and solicit your cooperation and involve ment in bringing about \nsound range and livestock management practices that wi ll enhance all of the a llotment's resources. If \nyou have any ideas or sugges tions that will improve the management of this allotment, we would like to \nhear from you. \n \n4 This 2009 Annual Operating Provisions for the So uth Wahoo C&H Allotment was discussed with \nthe Permittee on _October 30,2008_________________ . Understand that these operating \ninstructions are issued by the Fore st Officer in charge of the area unde r permit as provided in Clause 8a \nof your term grazing permit. As such, they require the same degree of complia nce as the regular terms \nof your permit. \n Approved By: __ _/s/Larry D. Cosper, District Ranger____ _________11/19/2008_________ _\n______ \n F o r e s t O f f i c e r i n C h a r g e D a t e Reviewed By:____ __/s/ Robert Weed_______ ______________ ___10/30/08______________\n____ \n Permittee Date \n5 6 \nSouth Wahoo C&H \n 2009 ACTUAL USE RECORD \n \nPlanned use from the AOI: \nAllotment Units Numbers Season \nSouth Wahoo \n \n \n c/c \nPlease fill in your actual use by the unit gr azed and the number of livestock and date s grazed in each unit. Bulls count as pa rt \nof your permitted numbers. \nUnit Number of \nLivestock Date entered \nUnit Date left \nUnit \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nLOSSES: Indicate number and class of animals lost by cause. \nUnit Class of Lvstk Predators Poison Other \n \n \n \n \nDays spent maintaining allotment improveme nts:_______Approximate cost of materials: $___________ \nApproximate cost to manage livestock on Natio nal Forest, including ri ding, salting etc.:$____________ \nCOMMENTS: \n \n \n \nSignature:___________________________________________Date:____________________________ " }

[ -0.0399572029709816, 0.030370421707630157, 0.044376205652952194, -0.0393618606030941, -0.036403629928827286, 0.010534337721765041, 0.024766050279140472, 0.018455279991030693, -0.05691962689161301, -0.009520421735942364, -0.012169262394309044, -0.06509020179510117, 0.01107028778642416, 0.008672639727592468, 0.0499531552195549, 0.04178779199719429, -0.010993992909789085, -0.008282138966023922, -0.06574422121047974, 0.01712976023554802, 0.023141084238886833, 0.0495031364262104, -0.08454786241054535, -0.03218139708042145, -0.011212140321731567, -0.046950072050094604, 0.055455613881349564, 0.12334471195936203, 0.1154308170080185, 0.008849823847413063, 0.057781681418418884, 0.01151974219828844, 0.05125947296619415, 0.00979091227054596, 0.07953570783138275, -0.010973967611789703, 0.038759998977184296, -0.04311541095376015, -0.010512271896004677, -0.053586602210998535, -0.006521896459162235, 0.017647787928581238, 0.060203272849321365, 0.004761650692671537, -0.06218786910176277, 0.06551522016525269, 0.03739229589700699, -0.01603628881275654, 0.020753856748342514, -0.049556806683540344, 0.021530061960220337, 0.04203897342085838, 0.0204252228140831, 0.018549274653196335, -0.009703440591692924, 0.021105622872710228, 0.026569096371531487, -0.03525374457240105, 0.01494596153497696, 0.029181402176618576, 0.07282260060310364, 0.03624267876148224, -0.004328390117734671, -0.025773264467716217, -0.0033992037642747164, 0.06473546475172043, 0.006245738361030817, -0.011997214518487453, 0.00767369382083416, -0.0179914478212595, 0.0874953344464302, -0.07112109661102295, 0.049996912479400635, 0.039272598922252655, 0.0689239576458931, -0.022079262882471085, -0.06987114250659943, 0.02843577228486538, 0.05790963023900986, -0.12672053277492523, -0.07078640908002853, 0.051876500248909, -0.0397849977016449, -0.003654745640233159, -0.04962586238980293, 0.06218622624874115, 0.03168787807226181, 0.07342994213104248, 0.08317030966281891, 0.035598695278167725, 0.00040194205939769745, -0.0740661546587944, -0.030812356621026993, -0.037708669900894165, 0.06825264543294907, -0.016721447929739952, 0.01801747828722, -0.06806495785713196, -0.03627333417534828, 0.020220333710312843, -0.03803614154458046, -0.028506016358733177, -0.02563703991472721, 0.025334306061267853, 0.02587313950061798, 0.03555826097726822, -0.01812482811510563, -0.010668491013348103, -0.07304901629686356, 0.04553406313061714, 0.08080095052719116, 0.022962983697652817, -0.0503033772110939, 0.012719239108264446, -0.018347280099987984, 0.031120965257287025, -0.051733605563640594, 0.017942363396286964, -0.016900500282645226, -0.058252863585948944, -0.028626248240470886, -0.023514028638601303, -0.04864000901579857, -0.0830991193652153, 0.014744053594768047, -0.0852118730545044, 0.0013797756982967257, 2.1577928990090704e-33, 0.0992494523525238, 0.11542990803718567, -0.050126105546951294, 0.06116790324449539, 0.11711697280406952, -0.03821166604757309, 0.03191313147544861, 0.0781981348991394, -0.001946537522599101, 0.059368014335632324, 0.037193045020103455, -0.02938511036336422, -0.02576075866818428, 0.03552228957414627, 0.00579171534627676, 0.014903184026479721, 0.06819777935743332, -0.03971131145954132, -0.014456411823630333, 0.04652855172753334, 0.0539066381752491, -0.10008639097213745, -0.03104451484978199, 0.024401109665632248, 0.0171497892588377, 0.007184343878179789, 0.003581469412893057, 0.03131856024265289, -0.028341980651021004, 0.026774587109684944, -0.010706857778131962, -0.05174201354384422, 0.06323100626468658, 0.01994291879236698, 0.04773617535829544, 0.01605878211557865, -0.04300734028220177, -0.008197571150958538, -0.059574298560619354, -0.0030817599035799503, 0.03671649098396301, -0.0035719741135835648, -0.019179683178663254, 0.008802903816103935, -0.017062867060303688, -0.03833476081490517, 0.08678507059812546, -0.07762309908866882, 0.040808241814374924, 0.001637993031181395, -0.04113965481519699, 0.01353396289050579, -0.052829496562480927, -0.017699306830763817, -0.008468507789075375, -0.03256505727767944, 0.0023720914032310247, -0.04649248719215393, -0.0181611068546772, -0.06488276273012161, -0.08122071623802185, 0.0328172892332077, -0.054656319320201874, 0.13503549993038177, -0.028758030384778976, -0.06157956272363663, 0.08147936314344406, -0.073512502014637, 0.08567056059837341, -0.14529336988925934, -0.010376549325883389, -0.03609966114163399, -0.02923065423965454, -0.06498772650957108, 0.014966637827455997, 0.03389137238264084, -0.02536487765610218, 0.0443936325609684, 0.018552321940660477, 0.030365029349923134, -0.027247831225395203, 0.03387288376688957, 0.00521205086261034, 0.018094340339303017, 0.03941287472844124, 0.038483161479234695, 0.02817709371447563, 0.026122143492102623, -0.049599289894104004, 0.013978628441691399, 0.07887252420186996, 0.010811787098646164, 0.01528627797961235, -0.015182040631771088, -0.03360680863261223, -4.166826253237611e-33, -0.06525314599275589, -0.06003287434577942, 0.03540273383259773, -0.09577949345111847, 0.008385092951357365, -0.04103993996977806, -0.05954457074403763, -0.11579521000385284, 0.02727694995701313, -0.10128910839557648, -0.032249245792627335, -0.028385531157255173, 0.009380689822137356, -0.07972563803195953, -0.0839473083615303, -0.0006478758878074586, -0.004536097869277, -0.024612411856651306, -0.02142958715558052, -0.0502762608230114, -0.023863863199949265, -0.009500868618488312, 0.059038255363702774, -0.014652927406132221, 0.005521783605217934, -0.0062411450780928135, -0.067385233938694, 0.06046237424015999, 0.026603808626532555, -0.016863061115145683, 0.03229379653930664, -0.025079619139432907, -0.0961594209074974, 0.006939292419701815, -0.07944680750370026, -0.10164982080459595, -0.009458636865019798, 0.04445146769285202, -0.056744616478681564, -0.007531158160418272, 0.03613249585032463, 0.10530148446559906, 0.0902063176035881, 0.04677976295351982, -0.09394051134586334, -0.07296669483184814, 0.03702313080430031, -0.17756952345371246, 0.00637864088639617, 0.019979115575551987, 0.07790863513946533, 0.025152627378702164, 0.0351862795650959, -0.08526947349309921, 0.038924701511859894, 0.015401817858219147, 0.08450088649988174, 0.013941803947091103, -0.07333052158355713, 0.04438894987106323, 0.08316773921251297, 0.04580029100179672, 0.03670401871204376, 0.10316391289234161, -0.028687430545687675, -0.02280132845044136, -0.026942117139697075, -0.023453358560800552, 0.07945580035448074, -0.015681862831115723, -0.02521834708750248, -0.0786341056227684, -0.08396156877279282, -0.04102756828069687, -0.04721164330840111, -0.07636656612157822, 0.03206099197268486, 0.017539015039801598, 0.018626179546117783, -0.0038587728049606085, -0.022983955219388008, 0.0140317901968956, -0.12046229839324951, 0.08483123034238815, 0.031720321625471115, -0.028455927968025208, 0.03266749158501625, -0.07198794931173325, 0.0876537412405014, 0.05298062413930893, -0.06306757032871246, 0.09905426949262619, -0.1216978058218956, -0.0004890202544629574, -0.06052779406309128, -5.046163664701453e-8, -0.006423045881092548, 0.021522825583815575, -0.08689437061548233, -0.0385308675467968, 0.003321853233501315, -0.041636575013399124, 0.020258354023098946, -0.03496207669377327, 0.016955463215708733, 0.010449834167957306, 0.06480679661035538, -0.0677616074681282, -0.0001809126988518983, -0.008711284957826138, -0.037598866969347, -0.07829360663890839, 0.08700811117887497, 0.027995338663458824, -0.06820517033338547, -0.03449900075793266, -0.015560521744191647, 0.011355205439031124, -0.003906805533915758, 0.009975608438253403, -0.04759839177131653, -0.018309488892555237, -0.05978381261229515, -0.054866790771484375, -0.009372560307383537, 0.1488245129585266, -0.020607320591807365, 0.057355862110853195, -0.006079754792153835, 0.011670801788568497, 0.011666836217045784, -0.06007413938641548, 0.06878499686717987, -0.055055879056453705, -0.009649612940847874, 0.06527331471443176, 0.047016263008117676, 0.1410396546125412, 0.022656302899122238, 0.05514207482337952, 0.018344998359680176, 0.02338431589305401, -0.03682875260710716, -0.06623789668083191, 0.03387049585580826, 0.02165899984538555, 0.03508976846933365, -0.03843674063682556, -0.006296350155025721, 0.048058681190013885, -0.04068632051348686, 0.06802945584058762, -0.02986958436667919, 0.02772044949233532, 0.04015195369720459, -0.009582020342350006, -0.06601589918136597, 0.00916671846061945, 0.016108473762869835, 0.02410297840833664 ]

{ "pdf_file": "Z2PBT7PYLNZKSJS4W7IDRXYXK55Y62YZ.pdf", "text": " \n \n \nDPLU #421 (Rev. 11/04) \n OWNER-BUILDER INFORMATION \n \n \nDear Property Owner: \n \nState law (Health and Safety Code, Secti ons 19830 and 19831) requires the County of \nSan Diego to notify you that an application for a building permit has been submitted in your \nname, listing you as the builder of the specified proper ty improvements. \n \nFor your protection, you should be aware that as \"owner-builder\" you are the responsible \nparty of record on such a permit. Buildi ng permits are not required to be signed by \nproperty owners unless they ar e personally performing their own work. If your work is \nbeing performed by someone other than yourself, you may protect yourself from possible \nliability if that person applies for t he proper permit in his or her name. \n \nContractors are required by law to be licens ed and bonded by the Stat e of California. \nThey also are required by law to put thei r license number on all permits for which they \napply. \n \nIf you plan to do your own work, with the exception of various trades that you plan to \nsubcontract, you should be aware of the fo llowing information for your benefit and \nprotection. \n \nIf you employ or otherwise engage any person ot her than your immediate family, and the \nwork (including materials and other costs) is $500 or more for the enti re project, and such \npersons are not licensed as contractors or subcontractors in t he State of California, then \nyou may be an employer. If you are an employer, you must r egister with the state and \nfederal government as an employ er and you are subject to several obligations including \nstate and federal income tax withholding, federal social security taxes, workers' \ncompensation insurance, disability insur ance costs, and unemployment compensation \ncontributions. There may be financial risks for you if you do not ca rry these obligations, \nand these risks are especially serious with res pect to workers' compensation insurance. \n \nFor more specific information about your obligat ion under federal law, contact the Internal \nRevenue Service (telephone number: 1-800-829-1040) and if you wish the Small Business \nAdministration (telephone number: (619) 557-7250). For more specific information about your obligations under state law, contact the Department of Indu strial Relations, Division of \nWorkers' Compensation (telephone number: (619) 767-2086). \n \nIf the structure is intended for sale, property owners who are not licens ed contractors are \nallowed to perform their work personally or through their own employees, without a \nlicensed contractor or subcontra ctor, only under limited conditions. \n \nA frequent practice of unlicensed persons profe ssing to be contractors is to secure an \n\"owner-builder\" building permit, erroneously impl ying that the property owner is providing \nhis or her own labor and materi als personally. There could be significant penalties for this \npractice. \n \nDPLU #421 (Rev. 11/04) Page 2 of 4 Department of Planning and Land Use Information about licensed contractors as well as the contracting laws discussed in this \nletter may be obtained by contacting the Contractor's State Licens e Board at 5280 Carroll \nCanyon Road, San Diego, Suite 250, Califor nia (telephone number: (800) 321-CSLB \n(2752) or at 1020 \"N\" Street, Sacramento, California 95814. \n \nPlease complete and return the enclos ed OWNER-BUILDER VERIFICATION form in \nperson or by mail so that we can confirm that you are aware of these matters. The \nbuilding permit will not be issued until the verification is returned. \n \n \n \n \n \nJEFF MURPHY, Chief \nBuilding Division \n OWNER-BUILDER VERIFICATION \n \n \nAttention Property Owner: \n \n \nAn \"Owner-Builder\" building permit has been applied for in your name. \n \nType of Project: Plan Check File Number: _______________ \n \nProject Address: _______________________________ _ \n \nPlease check one of the boxes below, complete this form , and return it in the envelope provided at your earliest \nopportunity to avoid unnecessary delay in processing and issuing your building permit. No building permit will \nbe issued until this verification is received. \n \n \nDPLU #421 (Rev. 11/04) County of San Diego \n Page 3 of 4 Department of Planning and Land Use 1 \n I will personally provide the labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. \n 2 \n I will contract (hire the following general contractor or firm to coordinate, supervise, and provide the labor for \nconstruction of the proposed property improvement: \n \nName: _ \n \nAddress: _ \n \nCity: Zip: _ \n \nTelephone No.: Contractors License No.: _ \n \n 3 \n I will provide portions of the work, but will contract (hire) the following contractor(s), subcontractor(s) or firm(s) to \ncoordinate, supervise, and provide labor for portions of the construction of the proposed property improvement. \n \nName: _ \n \nAddress: _ \n \nCity: Zip: _ \n \nTelephone No.: Contractors License No.: _ \n \n \nName: _ \n \nAddress: _ \n \nCity: Zip: _ \n \nTelephone No.: Contractors License No.: _ \n \n (Continued) \nName: _ \n \nAddress: _ \n \nCity: Zip: _ \n \nTelephone No.: Contractors License No.: _ \n \n \nName: _ \n \nAddress: _ \n \nCity: Zip: _ \n \nTelephone No.: Contractors License No.: _ \n \n \nDPLU #421 (Rev. 11/04) County of San Diego \n Page 4 of 4 Department of Planning and Land Use 4 \n I will provide portions of the work, but I will employ (hir e) the following person(s) to provide the labor indicated \nbelow for construction of the proposed property improvements: \n \n Name Address Telephone No. Type of Work \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n _ \n \n \nI declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at \n \n \n , , this day of , 20 . \n City or Area State Date Month Year \n \nProperty Owner: _ \n Signature " }

[ -0.07290243357419968, 0.052904147654771805, -0.01172507181763649, -0.025880305096507072, 0.039775993674993515, 0.05239589884877205, 0.014558019116520882, 0.0029187474865466356, 0.07317046821117401, 0.002212002407759428, 0.052347712218761444, 0.03624997287988663, 0.0011391794541850686, -0.053490497171878815, -0.010861851274967194, -0.007024697493761778, 0.0715494304895401, -0.03395971655845642, 0.04225057736039162, 0.05914860591292381, -0.098113514482975, 0.043115779757499695, -0.08377771824598312, 0.052479613572359085, -0.08763804286718369, 0.00942933838814497, -0.015456601046025753, 0.08938708156347275, 0.05763120576739311, -0.02943810448050499, -0.012876162305474281, 0.02842690236866474, -0.017643727362155914, 0.08650247752666473, 0.04990527778863907, -0.01617192104458809, 0.01648278906941414, -0.06194191053509712, -0.024653607979416847, -0.028193144127726555, 0.038137953728437424, -0.11041363328695297, -0.044410862028598785, -0.012427872978150845, -0.020792746916413307, 0.0003855004324577749, -0.00014591636136174202, 0.05024513229727745, -0.043871983885765076, 0.060172732919454575, 0.004301882814615965, -0.07416218519210815, 0.018813248723745346, -0.023715225979685783, -0.04066800698637962, -0.049125202000141144, 0.04844779893755913, 0.02581627294421196, 0.002639130689203739, 0.0547090508043766, 0.04751969128847122, -0.006597511004656553, -0.10112784057855606, 0.01167296152561903, -0.027107680216431618, 0.014577551744878292, -0.02361639030277729, -0.018524358049035072, 0.07072721421718597, -0.0738385021686554, 0.01623658463358879, 0.06081768870353699, -0.04419717192649841, 0.02763604000210762, -0.0306252408772707, 0.023042285814881325, 0.0031661230605095625, 0.08336492627859116, 0.05705465376377106, -0.15743345022201538, 0.024355005472898483, -0.052836932241916656, -0.0012577181914821267, -0.03283151984214783, -0.04169263318181038, -0.040698979049921036, -0.0308940801769495, 0.04697504639625549, 0.09752275049686432, 0.03397418186068535, 0.02167646959424019, -0.0011796518228948116, 0.05822259932756424, -0.014457899145781994, 0.0014192580711096525, 0.0002885194553527981, -0.0637764036655426, 0.033484891057014465, 0.026535270735621452, 0.10336457937955856, 0.06009929999709129, 0.14337055385112762, -0.05449042096734047, 0.02049696445465088, 0.004075068049132824, -0.039385102689266205, -0.051340438425540924, -9.535309004604642e-7, 0.04226567968726158, -0.03846443444490433, -0.04121951013803482, -0.026417933404445648, 0.027234205976128578, -0.05085844546556473, -0.013650093227624893, -0.0057364460080862045, -0.0026932901237159967, 0.11478026956319809, 0.0863419622182846, -0.08150515705347061, 0.01923258975148201, 0.02863132767379284, -0.04511849209666252, -0.013695504516363144, 0.06256963312625885, -0.0566578172147274, 0.01628984324634075, 6.931695495547174e-33, -0.015900179743766785, 0.03191135451197624, 0.011027656495571136, 0.007825558073818684, 0.05114886909723282, -0.04916675388813019, -0.024561073631048203, -0.027606001123785973, -0.04361458122730255, 0.02418496273458004, -0.03375421464443207, 0.02914775349199772, 0.12577344477176666, -0.03151026740670204, 0.02355317585170269, -0.022816138342022896, -0.025377720594406128, 0.010204639285802841, 0.0005787601112388074, 0.008706904016435146, 0.07000423222780228, -0.04130987077951431, 0.00963783822953701, 0.0799897089600563, -0.09430303424596786, 0.08861373364925385, -0.03678203374147415, -0.007032961584627628, -0.005114852450788021, 0.01777913048863411, 0.01691691391170025, -0.0388026088476181, 0.04263397306203842, 0.012098201550543308, 0.1616215705871582, 0.015589895658195019, 0.023556215688586235, -0.07054954022169113, 0.012644504196941853, -0.013989870436489582, -0.048455215990543365, -0.01809740625321865, -0.05727085843682289, -0.02744780108332634, -0.05934399366378784, -0.06080109626054764, 0.07172258198261261, -0.03264016658067703, 0.09127183258533478, 0.035310082137584686, 0.04466971382498741, 0.013525797054171562, -0.001092165126465261, -0.015209533274173737, -0.009770809672772884, -0.07070346921682358, -0.11069819331169128, 0.06503856182098389, -0.004304207861423492, -0.018837489187717438, 0.12579581141471863, 0.09544872492551804, -0.02540842443704605, 0.030951108783483505, -0.07606729865074158, -0.08597506582736969, -0.0487079918384552, -0.11611593514680862, 0.017034506425261497, -0.10301920771598816, 0.02713969349861145, 0.008611651137471199, 0.04067563638091087, -0.009264949709177017, -0.01507057435810566, -0.08596910536289215, -0.04131969064474106, 0.12820860743522644, 0.026407748460769653, -0.02523854561150074, -0.06863286346197128, 0.006451488472521305, -0.03316369652748108, 0.010792112909257412, -0.03774293512105942, -0.03764219582080841, 0.03537487983703613, -0.06739530712366104, -0.0365600660443306, 0.04700220376253128, -0.032301418483257294, 0.04021073505282402, -0.06835518777370453, 0.1157282218337059, 0.056456610560417175, -8.657939806456413e-33, -0.040523067116737366, -0.07569963485002518, -0.058505915105342865, -0.018535921350121498, -0.040346745401620865, 0.013814614154398441, 0.06964707374572754, -0.012069527059793472, 0.06699246913194656, 0.00048805426922626793, -0.0009189911070279777, 0.03312038630247116, -0.009149995632469654, -0.04276105761528015, -0.06107557192444801, -0.03897813335061073, 0.00047152681509032845, 0.09064419567584991, -0.004335455130785704, -0.013618440367281437, -0.005064303986728191, 0.08978352695703506, 0.005173576530069113, 0.030857888981699944, 0.04432359337806702, -0.03319579362869263, 0.10802029073238373, -0.032793376594781876, -0.03790965676307678, -0.021654685959219933, -0.0038784716743975878, 0.018855199217796326, -0.055901799350976944, 0.030676089227199554, -0.03683406114578247, -0.05182960256934166, 0.07736219465732574, 0.041494086384773254, -0.024609399959445, 0.026947101578116417, 0.035422708839178085, 0.10093169659376144, 0.027273859828710556, 0.03963366895914078, -0.027401568368077278, 0.04729122295975685, -0.0038011486176401377, -0.03341317176818848, 0.04968499019742012, -0.04853441193699837, -0.00423774728551507, -0.0038402597419917583, 0.07163943350315094, 0.07326332479715347, -0.017781205475330353, 0.03549943491816521, -0.05584514141082764, -0.018851788714528084, -0.04188001528382301, 0.03643590956926346, 0.08935057371854782, 0.054522980004549026, -0.02429807558655739, -0.024454889819025993, 0.112158864736557, 0.017571890726685524, -0.04532037302851677, 0.04599554091691971, 0.013990181498229504, -0.030535724014043808, -0.042192671447992325, -0.13524147868156433, -0.08620943129062653, -0.08175703883171082, 0.04731789231300354, -0.03876405954360962, 0.050440676510334015, 0.0031368406489491463, -0.14968420565128326, 0.0012194029986858368, 0.03567344695329666, -0.03779371455311775, -0.07793675363063812, 0.04359284043312073, 0.026351528242230415, -0.010569549165666103, 0.008838639594614506, 0.023585790768265724, -0.03840457648038864, 0.03590383380651474, 0.06157325580716133, 0.010364863090217113, -0.02164718136191368, 0.031771428883075714, -0.008336069993674755, -7.02649529671362e-8, -0.04678405076265335, -0.025044472888112068, -0.02582680433988571, -0.051614757627248764, 0.009191821329295635, -0.0071373735554516315, 0.06570938229560852, -0.09484609216451645, -0.08210278302431107, 0.0027136439457535744, -0.011458545923233032, -0.08205326646566391, -0.017997421324253082, -0.05025238171219826, -0.03168313950300217, 0.011053191497921944, -0.015511450357735157, -0.017918668687343597, -0.10389923304319382, 0.02863422781229019, -0.07653336226940155, -0.034159671515226364, -0.005859586410224438, -0.04238903149962425, -0.008724864572286606, -0.006581311579793692, 0.007352177053689957, -0.0511181466281414, -0.006356469355523586, 0.005986688192933798, -0.014825929887592793, 0.09706945717334747, -0.02453402429819107, -0.0617806613445282, -0.06614771485328674, 0.02979709580540657, -0.015522968955338001, 0.06087755784392357, 0.04947489872574806, 0.0409700870513916, -0.0971895232796669, 0.027949010953307152, -0.046745698899030685, 0.03265536576509476, 0.08281352370977402, 0.07164281606674194, -0.027592314407229424, -0.04826924204826355, -0.049269285053014755, -0.02664758265018463, 0.020190292969346046, -0.0768960565328598, 0.05003407597541809, 0.07835116237401962, -0.0001283198216697201, 0.04432781785726547, 0.04211752861738205, -0.002066047163680196, -0.0012488029897212982, -0.002109401160851121, 0.06544201076030731, -0.01839386112987995, 0.03196992352604866, -0.0005022714613005519 ]

{ "pdf_file": "MCE7YVRKTXPMRN7DYB25B22RCFFLLHOE.pdf", "text": " \n \n \n \n \n \n Mailed: July 9, 2013 \n Opposition No. 91211474 \nSerial No. 85704439 \n STAY JR., EDMUND L. 16456 162ND ST SE \nMONROE, WA 98272-2848 \nbgdade63@gmail.com \nPGA TOUR, INC. \nv. \n \nStay Jr., Edmund L., Stay, Esther M. \nMark D. Passler \nAkerman Senterfitt 222 Lakeview Avenue, 4th Floor West Palm Beach, FL 33401 ip@akerman.com \n \nESTTA547490 \n \n \nA notice of opposition to the registration sought by the above-\nidentified application has been filed. A service copy of the notice of \nopposition was forwarded to applicant (defendant) by the opposer \n(plaintiff). An electronic version of the notice of opposition is viewable in the electronic file for this proceeding via the Board's \nTTABVUE system: http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?qs=91211474\n. \n \nProceedings will be conducted in accordance with the Trademark Rules of \nPractice, set forth in Title 37, part 2, of the Code of Federal Regulations (\"Trademark Rules\") . These rules may be viewed at the \nUSPTO's trademarks page: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp\n. The Board's \nmain webpage (http://www.uspto.gov/trademark s/process/appeal/index.jsp ) includes \ninformation on amendments to the Trademark Rules applicable to Board proceedings, on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Frequently Asked \nQuestions about Board proceedings, and a web link to the Board's manual \nof procedure (the TBMP). \nPlaintiff must notify the Board when service has been ineffective, \nwithin 10 days of the date of receipt of a returned service copy or the \ndate on which plaintiff learns that service has been ineffective. \nPlaintiff has no subsequent duty to investigate the defendant's \nwhereabouts, but if plaintiff by its own voluntary investigation or UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE\nTrademark Trial and Appeal Board P.O. Box 1451 \nAlexandria, VA 22313-1451\n 2 through any other means discovers a newer correspondence address for \nthe defendant, then such address must be provided to the Board. Likewise, if by voluntary investigation or other means the plaintiff \ndiscovers information indicating that a different party may have an \ninterest in defending the case, such information must be provided to the Board. The Board will then effect service, by publication in the Official Gazette if necessary. See Trademark Rule 2.118. In \ncircumstances involving ineffective service or return of defendant's \ncopy of the Board's institution order, the Board may issue an order \nnoting the proper defendant and address to be used for serving that party. \n \nDefendant's ANSWER IS DUE FORTY DAYS after the mailing date of this \norder. (See Patent and Trademark Rule 1.7 for expiration of this or \nany deadline falling on a Saturday, Sunday or federal holiday.) Other \ndeadlines the parties must docket or calendar are either set forth below (if you are reading a mailed paper copy of this order) or are included in the electronic copy of this institution order viewable in \nthe Board's TTABVUE system at the following web address: \nhttp://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/\n. \n Defendant's answer and any other filing made by any party must include \nproof of service. See Trademark Rule 2.119. If they agree to, the \nparties may utilize electronic means, e.g., e-mail or fax, during the proceeding for forwarding of service copies. See Trademark Rule \n2.119(b)(6). \n The parties also are referred in particular to Trademark Rule 2.126, \nwhich pertains to the form of submissions. Paper submissions, \nincluding but not limited to exhibits and transcripts of depositions, not filed in accordance with Trademark Rule 2.126 may not be given consideration or entered into the case file. \n \n \n As noted in the schedule of dates for this case, the parties are required to have a conference to discuss: (1) the nature of and basis \nfor their respective claims and defenses, (2) the possibility of \nsettling the case or at least narrowing the scope of claims or Time to Answer 8/18/2013\nDeadline for Discovery Conference 9/17/2013Discovery Opens 9/17/2013\nInitial Disclosures Due 10/17/2013\nExpert Disclosures Due 2/14/2014\nDiscovery Closes 3/16/2014\nPlaintiff's Pretrial Disclosures 4/30/2014\nPlaintiff's 30-day Trial Period Ends 6/14/2014\nDefendant's Pretrial Disclosures 6/29/2014\nDefendant's 30-day Trial Period Ends 8/13/2014\nPlaintiff's Rebuttal Disclosures 8/28/2014\nPlaintiff's 15-day Rebuttal Period Ends 9/27/2014 3 defenses, and (3) arrangements relating to disclosures, discovery and \nintroduction of evidence at trial, should the parties not agree to settle the case. See Trademark Rule 2.120(a)(2). Discussion of the \nfirst two of these three subjects should include a discussion of \nwhether the parties wish to seek mediation, arbitration or some other means for resolving their dispute. Discussion of the third subject should include a discussion of whether the Board's Accelerated Case Resolution (ACR) process may be a more efficient and economical means \nof trying the involved claims and defenses. Information on the ACR \nprocess is available at the Board's main webpage. Finally, if the parties choose to proceed with the disclosure, discovery and trial procedures that govern this case and which are set out in the Trademark Rules and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, then they must discuss \nwhether to alter or amend any such procedures, and whether to alter or \namend the Standard Protective Order (further discussed below). Discussion of alterations or amendments of otherwise prescribed procedures can include discussion of limitations on disclosures or discovery, willingness to enter into stipulations of fact, and \nwillingness to enter into stipulations regarding more efficient options \nfor introducing at trial information or material obtained through disclosures or discovery. The parties are required to conference in person, by telephone, or by \nany other means on which they may agree. A Board interlocutory \nattorney or administrative trademark judge will participate in the conference, upon request of any party, provided that such participation is requested no later than ten (10) days prior to the deadline for the conference. See Trademark Rule 2.120(a)(2). The request for Board \nparticipation must be made through the Electronic System for Trademark \nTrials and Appeals (ESTTA) or by telephone call to the interlocutory attorney assigned to the case, whose name can be found by referencing \nthe TTABVUE record for this case at http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue /\n. The \nparties should contact the assigned interlocutory attorney or file a \nrequest for Board participation through ESTTA only after the parties \nhave agreed on possible dates and times for their conference. Subsequent participation of a Board attorney or judge in the conference will be by telephone and the parties shall place the call at the agreed date and time, in the absence of other arrangements made with the \nassigned interlocutory attorney. \n \nThe Board's Standard Protective Order is applicable to this case, but \nthe parties may agree to supplement that standard order or substitute a protective agreement of their choosing, subject to approval by the \nBoard. The standard order is available for viewing at: \nhttp://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/proce ss/appeal/guidelines/stndagmnt.jsp\n. Any party \nwithout access to the web may request a hard copy of the standard order from the Board. The standard order does not automatically protect a \nparty's confidential information and its provisions must be utilized as \nneeded by the parties. See Trademark Rule 2.116(g). \n \nInformation about the discovery phase of the Board proceeding is \navailable in chapter 400 of the TBMP. By virtue of amendments to the \nTrademark Rules effective November 1, 2007, the initial disclosures and \nexpert disclosures scheduled during the discovery phase are required only in cases commenced on or after that date. The TBMP has not yet \nbeen amended to include information on these disclosures and the \nparties are referred to the August 1, 2007 Notice of Final Rulemaking 4 (72 Fed. Reg. 42242) posted on the Board's webpage. The deadlines for \npretrial disclosures included in the trial phase of the schedule for this case also resulted from the referenced amendments to the Trademark \nRules, and also are discussed in the Notice of Final Rulemaking. \n \nThe parties must note that the Board allows them to utilize telephone \nconferences to discuss or resolve a wide range of interlocutory matters that may arise during this case. In addition, the assigned \ninterlocutory attorney has discretion to require the parties to \nparticipate in a telephone conference to resolve matters of concern to the Board. See TBMP § 502.06(a) (2d ed. rev. 2004). \n \nThe TBMP includes information on the introduction of evidence during \nthe trial phase of the case, including by notice of reliance and by \ntaking of testimony from witnesses . See TBMP §§ 703 and 704. Any \nnotice of reliance must be filed during the filing party's assigned \ntestimony period, with a copy served on all other parties. Any testimony of a witness must be both noticed and taken during the \nparty's testimony period. A party that has taken testimony must serve \non any adverse party a copy of the transcript of such testimony, together with copies of any exhibits introduced during the testimony, within thirty (30) days after the completion of the testimony deposition. See Trademark Rule 2.125. \n \nBriefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rules 2.128(a) and \n(b). An oral hearing after briefing is not required but will be \nscheduled upon request of any party, as provided by Trademark Rule \n2.129. \n \nIf the parties to this proceeding are (or during the pendency of this proceeding become) parties in another Board proceeding or a civil action involving related marks or other issues of law or fact which overlap with this case, they shall notify the Board immediately, so \nthat the Board can consider whether consolidation or suspension of \nproceedings is appropriate. \nESTTA NOTE: For faster handling of all papers the parties need to file \nwith the Board, the Board strongly encourages use of electronic filing \nthrough the Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA). \nVarious electronic filing forms, some of which may be used as is, and \nothers which may require attachments, are available at http://estta.uspto.gov\n. \n " }

[ -0.01911281794309616, 0.024446018040180206, 0.06082783639431, 0.005402576643973589, -0.06600739061832428, 0.04322957247495651, 0.03639201447367668, -0.048997290432453156, 0.0250433087348938, 0.017328685149550438, -0.06341234594583511, 0.026688938960433006, 0.02841511182487011, -0.01678420975804329, -0.0540437214076519, 0.029956530779600143, 0.106871597468853, -0.046774666756391525, 0.012969796545803547, 0.08034152537584305, 0.06441041827201843, 0.07693471014499664, -0.02115756645798683, 0.017271116375923157, 0.08029790967702866, -0.008594566956162453, -0.07426933199167252, -0.00809248723089695, 0.026240719482302666, -0.080075204372406, -0.0026352587155997753, 0.00280553987249732, 0.07432465255260468, 0.016189081594347954, 0.015458885580301285, -0.02437249757349491, 0.05933714658021927, 0.0006730563472956419, 0.07715905457735062, 0.014036347158253193, 0.013014393858611584, 0.017449939623475075, -0.0038553662598133087, 0.004745000507682562, -0.07778345793485641, 0.05270130932331085, 0.025936309248209, 0.007628356572240591, -0.04872927442193031, 0.0716235339641571, -0.020271815359592438, 0.035721056163311005, 0.0036218794994056225, 0.09989242255687714, -0.0010192395420745015, 0.08264350891113281, 0.018946371972560883, 0.005866550840437412, 0.030539441853761673, 0.06061617657542229, -0.07749415189027786, 0.006526156794279814, -0.08454742282629013, 0.04118823632597923, 0.012440684251487255, 0.020756393671035767, -0.016305366531014442, -0.019620496779680252, -0.017388150095939636, -0.028682107105851173, 0.01368679292500019, 0.05026404559612274, 0.030309824272990227, -0.004346448928117752, 0.018200095742940903, -0.04437383636832237, 0.05898383632302284, 0.04938136413693428, 0.12443836033344269, -0.005783517379313707, 0.004767701495438814, 0.016045067459344864, -0.029547741636633873, -0.08012602478265762, -0.01796591281890869, -0.05060475319623947, -0.07472604513168335, 0.08419167995452881, -0.032426994293928146, -0.041322749108076096, -0.03142375499010086, -0.02676651068031788, -0.022611523047089577, -0.010970255360007286, 0.04215869680047035, -0.005458321422338486, -0.07612720876932144, 0.12200455367565155, 0.055804334580898285, 0.08266427367925644, -0.033623695373535156, 0.06939038634300232, -0.04153222218155861, -0.05168075114488602, -0.03440656512975693, -0.04978909716010094, -0.028074897825717926, -0.015203829854726791, 0.029513154178857803, -0.020215099677443504, 0.020674491301178932, 0.010931679978966713, 0.016962038353085518, -0.007799878250807524, 0.03446544334292412, 0.03052300401031971, -0.07096464186906815, -0.009245364926755428, 0.05829893797636032, -0.0885268822312355, -0.008579729124903679, -0.0584690123796463, -0.042272523045539856, -0.07332617044448853, 0.05745917558670044, 0.05422118306159973, 0.06045663729310036, 4.87600934192839e-33, 0.04897984489798546, 0.021769121289253235, -0.04367329925298691, 0.009455718100070953, -0.0034717924427241087, 0.05563386529684067, -0.008590897545218468, -0.05015375837683678, 0.08374468237161636, -0.06948397308588028, -0.02585487812757492, -0.08005606383085251, 0.025597652420401573, -0.10162162780761719, -0.05478084087371826, -0.025116732344031334, -0.06643236428499222, 0.055331166833639145, -0.11798682808876038, -0.05905914679169655, 0.04932022839784622, 0.08045900613069534, -0.04451853036880493, 0.0207267627120018, 0.021157553419470787, -0.019716523587703705, 0.07255056500434875, -0.04307187721133232, 0.0030703656375408173, 0.033372629433870316, 0.025755442678928375, -0.045746129006147385, 0.006637073587626219, 0.09151100367307663, 0.08781040459871292, -0.03138219937682152, 0.02447550743818283, 0.014408173970878124, -0.0194639153778553, -0.07768618315458298, 0.014211339876055717, 0.050379008054733276, -0.01499441172927618, 0.03008587844669819, -0.030207982286810875, -0.03863350674510002, 0.01645301841199398, 0.050139229744672775, 0.06830670684576035, 0.008822635747492313, -0.03449097275733948, 0.026548068970441818, 0.059370968490839005, -0.02966475859284401, -0.017790043726563454, -0.026161978021264076, -0.008293703198432922, -0.01973988488316536, 0.0074462308548390865, -0.036629170179367065, -0.013131452724337578, 0.05847037956118584, 0.01155792735517025, -0.002246313262730837, -0.05114263296127319, -0.03292100131511688, -0.11904264241456985, -0.023486033082008362, 0.09124753624200821, -0.00505991093814373, 0.0720021203160286, -0.08935698121786118, 0.04460740089416504, 0.0019828276708722115, -0.06513557583093643, 0.04183420538902283, 0.10003618896007538, -0.056802358478307724, -0.034324634820222855, 0.028081143274903297, -0.06649229675531387, -0.03918110206723213, 0.013961934484541416, 0.0016965916147455573, 0.05174720287322998, -0.08595139533281326, 0.006860408466309309, -0.017469720914959908, 0.0763772502541542, -0.006612635683268309, 0.04223127290606499, -0.017552459612488747, 0.02485138550400734, 0.053317926824092865, -0.026687977835536003, -4.336578657755888e-33, 0.011660974472761154, -0.0007938725757412612, -0.049109797924757004, 0.06423554569482803, 0.018847167491912842, -0.03255363181233406, 0.029416702687740326, 0.009714910760521889, -0.003271723398938775, -0.1094941794872284, 0.024147212505340576, 0.03170466050505638, 0.012341736815869808, -0.015200401656329632, 0.015938058495521545, -0.022706953808665276, 0.06598066538572311, -0.013967837207019329, -0.04081898182630539, 0.06562849134206772, 0.00795236136764288, 0.0464945025742054, -0.08709686249494553, 0.022902846336364746, -0.0005407016142271459, 0.007034569513052702, 0.11619029939174652, -0.03239596635103226, 0.05780172348022461, 0.0483517087996006, -0.046603910624980927, -0.07891929894685745, -0.09094508737325668, 0.07237234711647034, -0.032955627888441086, 0.03292898088693619, 0.06530581414699554, -0.04333043098449707, -0.032836511731147766, 0.002362433820962906, 0.09071091562509537, 0.0475882813334465, 0.018153835088014603, 0.013456867076456547, -0.05997711792588234, -0.020520484074950218, -0.11339785158634186, -0.05043598636984825, -0.10881516337394714, 0.05470249429345131, -0.07111931592226028, 0.006087642163038254, -0.017284203320741653, -0.03406375274062157, -0.011687424965202808, -0.036118511110544205, -0.019119640812277794, 0.008950712159276009, 0.01585032232105732, 0.06843294203281403, 0.0004885062226094306, 0.061657849699258804, 0.057602256536483765, -0.11999014765024185, 0.02062171697616577, 0.04054151847958565, -0.10384266823530197, -0.0026979108806699514, 0.014909240417182446, 0.019656818360090256, 0.014358901418745518, -0.059747762978076935, -0.09392450004816055, -0.0289711095392704, -0.006775649730116129, 0.033870063722133636, 0.017646891996264458, 0.014240619726479053, -0.057898156344890594, -0.006545612588524818, -0.055043887346982956, 0.021022049710154533, -0.07220322638750076, -0.02696317620575428, 0.000446128222392872, 0.04661259800195694, -0.017134690657258034, 0.02213704027235508, -0.003648733254522085, 0.045861683785915375, -0.0021913237869739532, 0.023340700194239616, 0.0019289494957774878, 0.06128941848874092, 0.00998418778181076, -6.15241475543371e-8, 0.00987636111676693, -0.07268879562616348, 0.0021756950300186872, 0.009047317318618298, 0.02166455239057541, -0.10764139145612717, 0.029402706772089005, -0.10990709066390991, 0.008498664014041424, 0.02322833053767681, 0.1849629133939743, -0.061921071261167526, -0.04047507047653198, -0.12907138466835022, 0.05418301001191139, 0.00030565145425498486, -0.07631281763315201, 0.016521206125617027, -0.1119966134428978, -0.052219513803720474, 0.01809106022119522, -0.03934227675199509, 0.006656923331320286, 0.06497685611248016, 0.02207883819937706, 0.009303736500442028, -0.0016466360539197922, 0.08102975785732269, -0.01690848357975483, 0.04011314734816551, -0.05626939609646797, 0.14272542297840118, -0.08587324619293213, -0.05414212495088577, -0.0020708858501166105, 0.07798903435468674, -0.09694524109363556, 0.02690400741994381, 0.04252365231513977, 0.09707362949848175, -0.05974118411540985, -0.09276267886161804, -0.030633078888058662, 0.0383201502263546, 0.018790874630212784, -0.02275730110704899, -0.032185960561037064, -0.0029249833896756172, 0.01607638970017433, -0.03846210613846779, -0.07963281869888306, -0.04735325649380684, 0.025632033124566078, 0.026816049590706825, 0.03527279943227768, 0.10674767941236496, 0.05320897698402405, -0.051383573561906815, 0.03965382277965546, -0.037571314722299576, 0.020090166479349136, 0.06497850269079208, -0.03434954956173897, -0.00733646284788847 ]

{ "pdf_file": "QSPE3BHAI3DOO552RNZ5WXPJVIWAZ4LT.pdf", "text": "Congressional RecordUNUMEPLURIBUS\nUnited States\nof America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 114th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION\nbThis symbol represents the time of day during the House proceedings, e.g., b1407 is 2:07 p.m.\nMatter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor.\n.H9309 Vol. 161 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2015 No. 182 \nHouse of Representatives \nThe House met at noon and was \ncalled to order by the Speaker pro tem-pore (Mr. K\nELLY of Mississippi). \nf \nDESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO \nTEMPORE \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore laid be-\nfore the House the following commu-nication from the Speaker: \nWASHINGTON , DC, \nDecember 15, 2015. \nI hereby appoint the Honorable T RENT \nKELLY to act as Speaker pro tempore on this \nday. \nPAULD. R YAN, \nSpeaker of the House of Representatives. MORNING-HOUR DEBATE \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to the order of the House of Janu-ary 6, 2015, the Chair will now recog-nize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate. \nThe Chair will alternate recognition \nbetween the parties, with each party limited to 1 hour and each Member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited \nto 5 minutes, but in no event shall de-bate continue beyond 1:50 p.m. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF \nMILITARY FORCE \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nChair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. J\nONES ) for 5 min-\nutes. \nMr. JONES. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago \nwhen Secretary of Defense Ash Carter testified before the House Armed Serv-ices Committee, I asked him if Con-gress’ debating and voting on an Au-thorization for Use of Military Force, \nNOTICE \nIf the 114th Congress, 1st Session, adjourns sine die on or before December 24, 2015, a final issue of the Congres-\nsional Record for the 114th Congress, 1st Session, will be published on Thursday, December 31, 2015, to permit Members \nto insert statements. \nAll material for insertion must be signed by the Member and delivered to the respective offices of the Official Reporters \nof Debates (Room HT–59 or S–123 of the Capitol), Monday through Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. through Wednesday, December 30. The final issue will be dated Thursday, December 31, 2015, and will be delivered on Monday, January 4, 2016. \nNone of the material printed in the final issue of the Congressional Record may contain subject matter, or relate to \nany event, that occurred after the sine die date. \nSenators’ statements should also be formatted according to the instructions at http://webster.senate.gov/secretary/ \nDepartments/Reporters lDebates/resources/cong lrecord.pdf, and submitted electronically, either on a disk to accompany \nthe signed statement, or by e-mail to the Official Reporters of Debates at ‘‘Record@Sec.Senate.gov’’. \nMembers of the House of Representatives’ statements may also be submitted electronically by e-mail, to accompany \nthe signed statement, and formatted according to the instructions for the Extensions of Remarks template at https ://housenet.house.gov/legislative/research-and-reference/transcripts-and-records/electronic-congressional-record-inserts. \nThe Official Reporters will transmit to GPO the template formatted electronic file only after receipt of, and authentication with, the hard copy, and signed manuscript. Deliver statements to the Official Reporters in Room HT–59. \nMembers of Congress desiring to purchase reprints of material submitted for inclusion in the Congressional Record \nmay do so by contacting the Office of Congressional Publishing Services, at the Government Publishing Office, on 512– 0224, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. daily. \nBy order of the Joint Committee on Printing. \nGREGG HARPER, Chairman. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:05 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 8633 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE7.000 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9310 December 15, 2015 \nan AUMF, would help in the cause of \ndefeating ISIL. Secretary Carter said it would be helpful because we would need to show the troops that Congress sup-ports them. \nTwo weeks ago, the Obama adminis-\ntration announced that it would be sending an expeditionary force into Iraq and Syria to fight ISIS. In his col-umn last week entitled ‘‘Obama’s Quiet Shift in War on ISIS,’’ syndicated col-umnist Doyle McManus wrote: ‘‘If the first expeditionary forces succeed, as their record suggests they will, they will almost surely be followed by more.’’ I completely agree with Mr. McManus. \nMr. Speaker, on November 6, my col-\nleague J\nIMMCGOVERN and I, along with \n33 of our colleagues, wrote a letter to Speaker R\nYANurging him to allow de-\nbate on an AUMF on the House floor. We never received a response. Last week, J\nIMand I wrote Speaker R YAN \nanother letter urging him to allow a debate on the AUMF on the House floor as one of the first actions Congress takes when we come back in January 2016. \nMr. Speaker, President Obama con-\ntinues to escalate our involvement against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Our fight with ISIS isn’t going away any time soon, which is why it is high time Congress fulfills its constitutional duty and debates our role in the Middle East. As James Madison said: ‘‘The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the leg-islature.’’ The most important vote by a Member of Congress is to commit a young man or woman to fight and die for this country. \nMr. Speaker, I have two letters that \nI include in the R\nECORD . \nCONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES , \nWashington, DC, November 6, 2015. \nHon. P AULRYAN, \nSpeaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. \nD\nEAR SPEAKER RYAN: Among the issues \nthat require urgent attention by the U.S. House of Representatives is the question of the extent of involvement by the U.S. mili-tary in the war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Given the recent announce-ment by President Obama of a deepening en-tanglement in Syria and Iraq, it is critical that the House schedule and debate an Au-thorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) as quickly as possible. \nLast week, the president announced initia-\ntives that escalate U.S. engagement in com-bat operations in Syria and Iraq. Specifi-cally, the U.S. will deploy a U.S. Special Op-erations contingent into northern Syria to be embedded with and to advise opposition militant forces in that region; and U.S. mili-tary advisors and special operations forces already in Iraq will be embedded with Kurd-ish and Iraqi forces on the front lines of com-bat. Secretary of Defense Carter also stated that U.S. air operations in both Syria and Iraq will increase their bombing campaigns. Taken all together, these represent a signifi-cant escalation in U.S. military operations in the region and place U.S. military per-sonnel on the front lines of combat oper-ations. \nWe do not share the same policy prescrip-\ntions for U.S. military engagement in the re-gion, but we do share the belief that it is \npast time for the Congress to fulfill its obli-gations under the Constitution and vote on an AUMF that clearly delineates the author-ity and limits, if any, on U.S. military en-gagement in Iraq, Syria and the surrounding region. U.S. bombing campaigns have been going on for more than a year, and U.S. troops on the ground have been increasingly close to or drawn into combat operations, in-cluding the recent death in combat of a spe-cial operations soldier in Iraq. \nConsistent with your pledge to return to \nregular order, we urge you to direct the com-mittees of jurisdiction to draft and report out an AUMF as soon as possible. We do not believe in the illusion of a consensus author-ization, something that only happens rarely. We do believe the Congress can no longer ask our brave service men and women to con-tinue to serve in harm’s way while we fail in carrying out our constitutional responsi-bility in the area of war and peace. \nAs long as the House fails to assert its con-\nstitutional prerogatives and authority, the Administration may continue to expand the mission and level of engagement of U.S. Armed Forces throughout the region. We strongly urge you, Mr. Speaker, to bring an AUMF to the floor of the House as quickly as possible. \nSincerely, \nJames P. McGovern; Tom Cole; Barbara \nLee; Walter B. Jones; Peter Welch; John Lewis; Bill Posey; John Abney Culberson; Ryan K. Zinke; Richard L. Hanna; Thomas Massie; Ted S. Yoho; Ed Whitfield; Dana Rohrabacher; Jus-tin Amash; Mark Sanford; Paul A. Gosar; Mick Mulvaney; John J. Dun-can, Jr.; Matt Salmon; Rau ´l R. Lab-\nrador; Janice D. Schakowsky; Peter A. DeFazio; Charles B. Rangel; Louise M. Slaughter; Janice Hahn; Joseph P. Kennedy; Michael C. Burgess; Chellie Pingree; John Garamendi; Joseph Crowley; David N. Cicilline; John Con-yers, Jr.; Beto O’Rourke; Daniel T. Kil-dee. \nCONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES , \nWashington, DC, December 10, 2015. \nHon. P AULRYAN, \nSpeaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. \nD\nEAR SPEAKER RYAN: We write to you \nagain to strongly urge you to bring before the U.S. House of Representatives an Au-thorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) related to U.S. military involve-ment in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere against the Islamic State. We ask that you schedule the debate and vote on an AUMF resolution in January when the 114th Congress recon-venes in 2016. \nAs you are aware, U.S. involvement in Iraq \nand Syria continues to escalate. In both countries, U.S. special operations forces are engaged in front-line operations. Last month a bipartisan group of 35 Members of the House, representing a broad ideological spec-trum, called on you to schedule such a de-bate as soon as possible. As that letter stat-\ned: ‘‘We do believe the Congress can no longer ask our brave service men and women to continue to serve in harm’s way while we fail in carrying out our constitutional re-sponsibility in the area of war and peace.’’ We are attaching a copy of that letter for your convenience and review. In subsequent media reports, we were deeply disappointed to read that you do not believe that the 114th Congress needs to act on a new AUMF to wage war against the Islamic State, but rather that the 14-year-old and 13-year-old AUMFs approved by the 107th Congress under starkly different circumstances pro-vide the president with all the authority he requires. We firmly believe that among the most im-\nportant duties of Congress is that of debat-ing and voting on whether to send U.S. armed forces into battle. On this matter, the Constitution is crystal clear: it is the duty of Congress to authorize such engagement. We believe that it violates our oath of office to continue to ignore this urgent and serious matter. \nTen months ago, the president sent a draft \nAUMF to Congress for consideration and last Sunday he called, once again, on Congress to approve a new AUMF. It is now the role of the Speaker to direct the committee of juris-diction to approve the Administration’s draft, or to amend it, or to draft a new version of the AUMF and to schedule that resolution for consideration and a vote by the full House as expeditiously as possible. \nOnce again, we strongly urge you to bring \nan AUMF before the House in January 2016 so that the House may debate and vote on authorizing U.S. military operations in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere against the Islamic State. We look forward to receiving your re-sponse. \nSincerely, \nJ\nAMES P. M CGOVERN , \nMember of Congress. \nWALTER B. J ONES , \nMember of Congress. \nMr. JONES. Mr. Speaker, if we do not \nmeet our responsibility, we will be-come complicit in the loss of life among our troops. How many young \nchildren will have a loved one that doesn’t come home from fighting for this country? \nThe picture here, Mr. Speaker, is the \nfirst one that I brought after we went into an unnecessary war known as Iraq. His daddy, Phillip Jordan, was a gun-nery sergeant who was killed in 2003. The little boy’s name is Tyler Jordan. This is actually 12 years ago, and now he is 18 years of age. How many more children will have to go without a fa-ther or a mother or a brother or sister who lost their life in war? \nWe need to meet our constitutional \nresponsibility. It is embarrassing that we in Congress—I don’t even think we have a right to criticize the President, quite frankly. Let’s do our job based on the Constitution. Let’s do our job and debate a new AUMF or a declaration of war. Let’s meet our responsibility for the good of our men and women in uni-form and their families. \nMr. Speaker, I ask God to please \nbless our Nation, bless our men and women in uniform, and, please, God, continue to bless America. \nf \nTAX EXTENDERS \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nChair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. H\nOYER ) for 5 minutes. \nMr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, within the \nnext few days, the House could take up a tax package that extends a number of tax breaks permanently. The cost of such a package runs in the $600 billion to $800 billion range—none of which is paid for—ballooning our deficits in a way that reinforces a misguided double standard that investments in the growth of jobs and opportunities must be offset, but tax cuts are always free. \nTax cuts, like everything else, have a \ncost. If we fail to pay for them, we will \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:01 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.002 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9311 December 15, 2015 \nonce again increase deficits and debt, \nwhich in turn will be used as the cata-lyst for another round of cuts to the very programs I believe are vital to our economy and to our people. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I will oppose an unpaid- for tax extenders package like this that is proposed, should it come to the floor. \nBefore going through my concerns \nabout this deal in greater detail, let me say that the package being discussed has a number of tax preferences that I and many others support. These in-clude making permanent expansions of the earned income tax credit, the child tax credit, and the American oppor-tunity tax credit launched under the Recovery Act in 2009. It would also pro-vide incentives to businesses and indi-vidual filers for investment, research, charitable contributions, and teaching expenses, among others. Most of us support those efforts. \nIn many ways, this would be a bill \nwhere everyone gets something they want. But, Mr. Speaker, our children and grandchildren will get the bill. \nWhat concerns me most about this \ndeal is that it further entrenches the false notion that offsets only matter when it comes to spending priorities. The direct consequences will be pro-viding Republicans with the ammuni-tion they need to propose even deeper cuts to the very investments that help grow the economy and create jobs both in the short term and in the long term. \nFrankly, I am surprised that we \nhaven’t heard more of an outcry that the roughly $800 billion in lost revenue from this package is nearly the same amount as the $813 billion in discre-tionary cuts Republicans insisted upon in the sequester. It would appear that we are setting ourselves up for Repub-licans demanding the next round of se-vere cuts that harm our economy and our people, both on the nondefense side and on the national security side. Frankly, Mr. Speaker, we must move away from this dangerous pattern. \nRepublicans have continued to argue \nthat tax cuts pay for themselves by spurring economic growth, a theory that has been proven wrong, and, sadly, as I said, our children will pay the price for the deficits that have re-sulted. Others will argue that the ef-fect on our deficits and debt of another $700 billion in unpaid-for tax expendi-tures over the next 10 years can be ig-nored because we would extend them every year anyway. While convenient, neither of these is a responsible posi-tion for governing. \nIn a Wall Street Journal piece last \nMonday, Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget—the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget—asked: ‘‘How do we explain to our children that we borrowed more than $1 tril-lion—counting interest—not because it was a national emergency or to make critical investments in the future but because we just don’t like paying our bills?’’ Our answer has to be not to justify \nthe irresponsible behavior, but to cor-rect it. And this tax extenders package will make that much more difficult. First, this package undermines Con-gress’ ability to invest in creating jobs and opportunities that make the Amer-ican Dream possible for millions of families. \nWhen we cut taxes without paying \nfor them, there are consequences. Every dollar in lost revenue is a dollar that must be made up somewhere else in the budget. As I said earlier, these unpaid-for tax extenders will set the table for further Republican attempts to slash critical investments in our Na-tion’s future. \nSecondly, Mr. Speaker, it will hinder \nour ability to restore fiscal stability by making it less likely that we will be able to protect the future sustain-ability of entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security. \nIn order to appear balanced, recent \nRepublican budgets proposed trillions of dollars in cuts to health programs for seniors and the most vulnerable in our society. Worsening our deficit out-look by passing this bill invites them to continue that tack. \nWhile we face a challenge to our \nmost critical retirement and health programs—a challenge driven by the retirement of the baby boom genera-tion and the looming effect of com-pound interest on our debt—my Repub-lican friends continue to offer budget proposals that severely cut benefits for seniors and the most vulnerable Ameri-cans and they try to justify doing so because our deficits are too high. Their proposal would exacerbate that by about $1 trillion, as Maya MacGuineas said. Here we are, though, about to consider proposals to raise the deficits even higher. \nThirdly, Mr. Speaker, this type of un-\npaid-for, permanent extension will un-dercut our economic competitiveness by making comprehensive tax reform more difficult to achieve, not easier. We need comprehensive tax reform, and this will make it more difficult. Locking in preferences while lowering the revenue baseline by more than half a trillion dollars will ensure a plunge into further debt. \nMr. Speaker, I continue to believe \nthat the business community would much prefer to see rates go down through comprehensive reform than simply an extension of individual pref-erences. This bill promises them both— more preferences and lower rates—at the cost of deficits, debt, and dimin-ished investment in our economic com-petitiveness. \nThere are certainly components of \nthis tax extenders package that I, as I said before, would like to make perma-nent. I wish we could make them even better, in fact. For instance, the child tax credit should be structured to keep \nup with inflation so those working the hardest to get by don’t continue to see their resources dwindle year after year. \nAgain, let me quote Maya \nMacGuineas when she highlighted this important point in her op-ed when she \nsaid: ‘‘Most of the extensions under consideration are sensible enough pol-icy—and their merit is an argument for paying for them.’’ \nI couldn’t agree more. This tax ex-\ntenders package, itself, serves as a powerful argument for Democrats and Republicans to come together to achieve that which we really need: comprehensive tax reform. \nSo, in closing, Mr. Speaker, while I \nagree we need short-term certainty for tax filers before the end of the year, I believe the price this package would have us pay is too steep and too irre-sponsible in the short term and in the longer term. Instead, we could provide that same immediate certainty with a simple 2-year extension. That is what we ought to do. \nMr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to \nthink carefully about the long-term impact and consequences of this tax ex-tenders package on the ability to cre-ate jobs and opportunities, grow our economy, invest in strengthening our security, reduce our Nation’s debt, and balance our budget. \nIn closing, Mr. Speaker, I believe \nthat this Congress and our people ex-pect us to do better. We have a respon-sibility to our country and to our chil-dren to do better. Let’s do it. \nf \nb1215 \nANDERSON TRUCKING: A \nMINNESOTA SUCCESS STORY \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nChair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. E\nMMER ) for 5 minutes. \nMr. EMMER of Minnesota. Mr. \nSpeaker, I rise today to recognize An-derson Trucking Service for their im-pressive 60 years of business. \nThe founder of Anderson Trucking, \nHarold Anderson, grew up in the trans-portation industry and began hauling granite with his father. In those early years, Harold developed a strong inter-est in machinery and driving. So it was no surprise when he chose to pursue a career in trucking. \nHarold officially started Anderson \nTrucking Service after he returned home from World War II. The company is now run by Harold’s sons, Rollie and Jim, as well as his grandsons, Brent and Scott. \nOver the years, Anderson Trucking \nhas grown and prospered, but the An-derson family has never forgotten their roots. The company and the Anderson family represent the best St. Cloud and central Minnesota have to offer. The customer service of Anderson Trucking is only matched by the community service provided by the Andersons and their great employees. \nToday Anderson Trucking has thou-\nsands of rigs, hundreds of drivers, and has driven millions of miles. The An-dersons, however, do not just measure success by the number of miles driven or the number of deliveries made, but also by the high level of the customer service that the company provides. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:29 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.003 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9312 December 15, 2015 \nFor the past 6 decades, this inter-\nnational transportation company has successfully and safely delivered freight to their valued customers. \nWe look forward to seeing the contin-\nued success of Anderson Trucking for this generation and generations to come. \nCongratulations on your first 60 \nyears. \nPREFERRED CREDIT , INC., EMBODIES MINNESOTA \nNICE \nMr. EMMER of Minnesota. Mr. \nSpeaker, I rise today to recognize Pre-ferred Credit, Inc., of St. Cloud, Min-nesota, for winning a Torch Award for Ethics from the Minnesota Better Busi-ness Bureau. \nPreferred Credit was established in \nSt. Cloud in 1982 and quickly realized their goal of becoming one of the pre-ferred finance companies for the direct sales industry throughout the United States. This outstanding Minnesota company accomplished this goal by giving their clients the best possible customer service and building strong, personal relationships. \nThe way Preferred Credit achieves \nsuccess is evidence of how deserving they are of this award. The Torch Awards are meant to recognize compa-nies that go above and beyond for their customers, employees, vendors, and community. \nI would like to congratulate Pre-\nferred Credit, Incorporated, for receiv-ing this prestigious award and for rep-resenting what Minnesota is all about. \nThank you for everything you have \ncontributed to the St. Cloud commu-nity and to the great State of Min-nesota. We would not be where we are today without great businesses like yours. \nTHE BACKBONE OF MINNESOTA SMALL BUSINESS \nAND AMERICA \nMr. EMMER of Minnesota. Mr. \nSpeaker, I rise today to discuss over-regulation. \nChair of the Federal Reserve, Janet \nYellen, recently said that small com-munity banks really are suffering from regulatory overload. I absolutely agree. \nCommunity banks and credit unions \nare struggling with excessive and over-ly burdensome regulation. \nToday 17 of my colleagues on the \nHouse Financial Services Committee and I sent a letter to the Consumer Fi-nancial Protection Bureau, better known as the CFPB, regarding the most recent addition to the pile of reg-ulations harming consumers and com-munity financial institutions, the newly revised Regulation C. \nRegulation C requires most banks \nand credit unions to collect new per-sonal data on loan applications begin-ning January 1, 2018. This regulation essentially doubles the current require-ments triggered by Dodd-Frank. \nThe CFPB, without adequate jus-\ntification of need, now wants personal information, including business or commercial information, property val-ues, property addresses, credit scores, and interest rates. This appears to be a government agency fishing expedition \nthat should raise serious concerns re-lating to our personal privacy and lib-erties. \nThis significantly higher regulatory \nhurdle means community financial in-stitutions will have to allocate more of their limited resources to deal with Washington’s red tape, rather than pro-viding loans to families and businesses in Minnesota. \nIt is my hope that the CFPB will ex-\nempt small community financial insti-tutions from this new burden, or we will have to work to draft legislation that will help our small community banks in Minnesota because, as I often say, Mr. Speaker, what is good for Min-nesota is good for America. \nf \nJUSTICE FOR ALL \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nChair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. A\nLGREEN ) for 5 minutes. \nMr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speak-\ner, I rise today and I stand in the well of the House as a proud American. \nI love my country, Mr. Speaker. Be-\ncause I love my country, I have tried not to forget those who go to distant places, those who go into harm’s way. They do it because they love the coun-try. Many of them do not come back the same way they left, Mr. Speaker. They are the men and women who serve in our military. I never want to forget the sacrifices that they make. \nToday I want to salute and honor \nthem for the many causes that they \nhave taken up and for the many times that they have left their homes and their loved ones to stand up for liberty and justice for all, to make real the great American ideals, and to provide us the safety and security that we have today. \nBut I also stand here today in the \nwell of the House, Mr. Speaker, to an-nounce my solidarity for justice, my solidarity with the Muslim community for justice, because I understand what it is like to be a part of a community that is treated unjustly. \nI lived through segregation in the \nUnited States of America. I know what it is like to go to the back door. I know what it is like to drink from filthy ‘‘colored’’ water fountains. I know what injustice looks like. I have seen its face. I know what it smells like. \nI have been in waiting rooms where \nonly Blacks could sit. They were for Blacks only because there were other places for others. I don’t want to see anything like that, similar to that— anything that is remotely similar— occur to someone else. \nI am standing here today in soli-\ndarity with the Muslim community be-cause of the injustice that is being per-petrated against Islam. \nI am a Christian. My grandfather was \na Christian minister. But I stand here to support Islam today, one of the great religions of the world. I do this, Mr. Speaker, because to demean Islam by adding the word terrorist with it is an injustice to the religion. Islam is a peaceful religion. No reli-\ngion condones the taking of innocent lives intentionally. Let me repeat this. No religion condones taking the lives of innocent persons intentionally. \nThis is why I am here, because I want \nto make it clear that Islam does not condone this. We should not be talking about Islamic terrorists. Why not call them what they are: people who com-mit dastardly deeds. If you do it in the name of a religion, that doesn’t make what you do a part of the religion. Peo-ple ought not be found guilty by their affiliation with a religion. \nWhat these people are doing—ISIL, al \nQaeda, Daesh, ISIS, any name—is evil, and we ought to call it such. It is not Islam. We ought not, as a result, decide that we are going to bar all members of the Islamic faith from this country. That would be wrong, Mr. Speaker. To even consider it is something that I find repugnant: barring all people be-cause of their faith. \nThe Islamic faith is not—is not—the \nmotivating factor behind all of this in-justice that we see perpetrated by ISIL. They can claim what they want, but the members of the faith have spo-ken up. \nIn Houston, Texas, we met just re-\ncently and discussed this at length. Every Muslim in that room denounced what was being perpetrated and perpet-uated by ISIL, by ISIS, by any name— evil. We ought not do this to a great re-ligion. \nI stand for justice, and I stand for \njustice for the Islamic faith. I believe that persons who are in harm’s way in Syria and in other countries ought to be given an opportunity to escape harm. \nI believe that the Good Samaritan \nwas right. The Good Samaritan didn’t ask: What will happen to me if I help this person who is in harm’s way? The Good Samaritan posed the question: What will happen to him if I don’t help him? \nThat is the question we have to ask \nourselves as it relates to our brothers and sisters. They are our brothers and sisters because there is but one race. That is the human race. \nOne God created all of humanity to \nlive in harmony, to quote Dr. King. But the question we have to ask is: What will happen to them if we don’t extend the hand of friendship? \nThe Good Samaritan went so far as \nto take the person to a place where there was shelter, where the person could receive some attention, and said to the innkeeper, if you will: Extend me a line of credit. If this person needs more than what I can give you today, I will come back and I will take care of my line of credit. \nWe owe it to ourselves, as a great \nleader of the world, the world leader, to make sure that we extend justice to Islam. \nMr. Speaker, I include for the \nR\nECORD a list of the persons who were \nin attendance at the meeting. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:29 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.005 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9313 December 15, 2015 \nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES , \nWashington, DC, December 13, 2015. \nTopic: Meeting with Community Leaders to \nDiscuss Various Issues of Importance that Impact America, our Community, and Future Generations. \nHosted by: Congressman Al Green. \nLIST OF PARTICIPANTS \n1. Tahir Javid, President, Pakistan Asso-\nciation of Golden Triangle \n2. M.J. Khan, President, Islamic Society of \nGreater Houston \n3. Mehmet Okumus, President, Turkish \nCommunity \n4. Muhammad Sheikh, President, Houston- \nKarachi Sister City Association \n5. Mian Nazir, President, Pakistan Associa-\ntion of Greater Houston \n6. Mustafa Carrol, Executive Directory, \nCAIR USA \n7. Shahnela Nasim, President, South Asian \nChamber of Commerce \n8. Shah Haleem, Chairman, Bangladesh As-\nsociation of Greater Houston \n9. Khalid Khan, Vice-Chair, Bangladesh As-\nsociation of Greater Houston \n10. Murad Ajani, President, His Highness \nThe Agha Khan Council \n11. Jamal Entlique, Vice President, Hous-\nton-Abhu Dabhi Sister City Association \n12. Matloob Khan, President, Shah Latif \nCultural Institute \n13. Syed Akhtar, President, Pakistan \nChamber of Commerce-USA \n14. Ilyas Choudry, Islamic Circle of North \nAmerica \n15. Shabbir Hussain, ICNA Houston Chap-\nter \n16. Representation from Arab American \nCommunity Cultural Center \n17. Abuzer Tyabjee, Dawoodi Bora Commu-\nnity \n18. Latafat Hussain, Indian Muslim Asso-\nciation of Greater Houston \n19. Syed Shahid Sunni, President, Muslim \nConsul USA \n20. Akhtar-Abdullah, Al-Noor Society of \nGreater Houston \n21. Mohammad Junggua Community Mem-\nber \n22. John Shike WAA TV 23. Saeed B. Gadi, (P.A.S.T.) and Pakistan \nPost. \n24. Mahmud Dahri, Shah Latif Cultural In-\nstitute \n25. Abdul Sattar Quereshi, PAGH. \nMEDIA \n1. Shamim Syed, Pakistan News \n2. Tariq Khan, Pakistan Chronicle 3. Kamran Jilani, Pakistan Journal and \nPakistan Chronicle \n4. Mahmood Ahmed, Urdu Times 5. Tariq Hameed, Geo News 6. Zahid Akhtar Khanzada, Geo News and \nJang Group. \nf \nRECESS \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until 2 p.m. today. \nAccordingly (at 12 o’clock and 25 \nminutes p.m.), the House stood in re-cess. \nf \nb1400 \nAFTER RECESS \nThe recess having expired, the House \nwas called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. W\nALKER ) at 2 p.m. \nf \nPRAYER \nThe Chaplain, the Reverend Patrick \nJ. Conroy, offered the following prayer: Merciful God, we give You thanks for \ngiving us another day. \nBless the Members of the people’s \nHouse as they work toward the dif-ficult and complicated task of funding our government in a fair and equitable manner. May they negotiate with one another in good faith and trust in a shared love for our Nation. \nBless our Nation and its citizens as \nwe approach the end of 2015. Help us to look to the future with hope, and com-mitted to a renewed effort to work to-gether for a united America. \nHelp us all to be truly grateful for \nthe blessings of this past year. \nAnd, as always, we pray that all that \nis done this day be for Your greater honor and glory. \nAmen. \nf \nTHE JOURNAL \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nChair has examined the Journal of the last day’s proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof. \nPursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Jour-\nnal stands approved. \nMr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. \nSpeaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker’s approval of the Journal. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nquestion is on the Speaker’s approval of the Journal. \nThe question was taken; and the \nSpeaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. \nMr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. \nSpeaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 8, rule XX, further pro-ceedings on this question will be post-poned. \nThe point of no quorum is considered \nwithdrawn. \nf \nPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the \ngentleman from South Carolina (Mr. W\nILSON ) come forward and lead the \nHouse in the Pledge of Allegiance. \nMr. WILSON of South Carolina led \nthe Pledge of Allegiance as follows: \nI pledge allegiance to the Flag of the \nUnited States of America, and to the Repub-lic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. \nf \nTHANK YOU, GOVERNOR HALEY \n(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina \nasked and was given permission to ad-dress the House for 1 minute and to re-vise and extend his remarks.) \nMr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. \nSpeaker, I appreciate Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina for her deci-sion to enforce the law and fine the De-partment of Energy for failing to proc-ess weapons-grade plutonium, which the Department was statutorily man-dated by 50 U.S. Code, Section 2566. While the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrica-\ntion Facility is about 70 percent com-pleted, it will not be able to meet the January 1, 2016, deadline establishing a $1 million a day fine up to $100 million annually. This was documented today in the Aiken Standard by SRS beat re-porter Derrek Asberry. \nWhile other options have been exam-\nined using flawed, biased studies, they are not real alternatives because the MOX process is the only viable, legal option under our nuclear nonprolifera-tion agreement with the Russian Fed-eration. Additionally, it converts weap-ons-grade plutonium into green fuel, promotes nuclear nonproliferation, and eliminates the need for a repository. \nThe Department of Energy should \ncommit to complete the MOX project in its entirety, as it promised the peo-ple of South Carolina, especially when considering the economic and environ-mental impact of storing the material. \nIn conclusion, God bless our troops, \nand may the President by his actions never forget September the 11th in the global war on terrorism. \nf \nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE \nCLERK OF THE HOUSE \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore laid be-\nfore the House the following commu-nication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives: \nOFFICE OF THE CLERK , \nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES , \nWashington, DC, December 15, 2015. \nHon. P AULD. R YAN, \nThe Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. \nD\nEAR MR. SPEAKER : Pursuant to the per-\nmission granted in Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representa-tives, the Clerk received the following mes-sage from the Secretary of the Senate on De-cember 15, 2015 at 9:29 a.m.: \nThat the Senate passed H.R. 2270. That the Senate passed S. 2044. Appointment: United States-China Economic Security \nReview Commission. \nWith best wishes, I am \nSincerely, \nK\nAREN L. H AAS. \nf \nAPPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO \nTHE UNITED STATES HOLO-CAUST MEMORIAL COUNCIL \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nChair announces the Speaker’s ap-pointment, pursuant to 36 U.S.C. 2302, and the order of the House of January 6, 2015, of the following Members on the part of the House to the United States Holocaust Memorial Council: \nMr. I\nSRAEL , New York \nMr. D EUTCH , Florida \nf \nRECESS \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until ap-proximately 4 p.m. today. \nAccordingly (at 2 o’clock and 5 min-\nutes p.m.), the House stood in recess. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:29 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE7.003 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9314 December 15, 2015 \nb1600 \nAFTER RECESS \nThe recess having expired, the House \nwas called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. C\nOLLINS of New York) at \n4 p.m. \nf \nANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER \nPRO TEMPORE \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule XX. \nRecord votes on postponed questions \nwill be taken later. \nf \nCOMBAT TERRORIST USE OF \nSOCIAL MEDIA ACT OF 2015 \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to \nsuspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3654) to require a report on United States strategy to combat ter-rorist use of social media, and for other purposes, as amended. \nThe Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: \nH.R. 3654 \nBe it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-\nresentatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, \nSECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. \nThis Act may be cited as the ‘‘Combat Ter-\nrorist Use of Social Media Act of 2015’’. \nSEC. 2. REPORT ON STRATEGY TO COMBAT TER-\nRORIST USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Not later than 90 days \nafter the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall transmit to the appro-priate congressional committees a report on United States strategy to combat terrorists’ and terrorist organizations’ use of social media. \n(b) E\nLEMENTS .—The report required by sub-\nsection (a) shall include the following: \n(1) An evaluation of what role social media \nplays in radicalization in the United States and elsewhere. \n(2) An analysis of how terrorists and ter-\nrorist organizations are using social media, including trends. \n(3) A summary of the Federal Govern-\nment’s efforts to disrupt and counter the use of social media by terrorists and terrorist or-ganizations, an evaluation of the success of such efforts, and recommendations for im-provement. \n(4) An analysis of how social media is being \nused for counter-radicalization and counter- propaganda purposes, irrespective of whether or not such efforts are made by the Federal Government. \n(5) An assessment of the value of social \nmedia posts by terrorists and terrorist orga-nizations to law enforcement. \n(6) An overview of social media training \navailable to law enforcement and intel-ligence personnel that enables such per-sonnel to understand and combat the use of social media by terrorists and terrorist orga-nizations, as well as recommendations for improving or expanding existing training op-portunities. \n(c) F\nORM.—The report required by sub-\nsection (a) should be submitted in unclassi-fied form, and may include a classified annex in accordance with the protection of intel-ligence sources and methods. SEC. 3. POLICY AND COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY \nTO COUNTER TERRORISTS’ AND TER-RORIST ORGANIZATIONS’ USE OF SO-CIAL MEDIA. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Not later than 180 days \nafter the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall transmit to the appro-priate congressional committees a report that contains a comprehensive strategy to counter terrorists’ and terrorist organiza-tions’ use of social media, as committed to in the President’s 2011 ‘‘Strategic Implemen-tation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States’’. \n(b) F\nORM.—The report required by sub-\nsection (a) should be submitted in unclassi-fied form, and may include a classified annex in accordance with the protection of intel-ligence sources and methods. \nSEC. 4. APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMIT-\nTEES DEFINED. \nIn this Act, the term ‘‘appropriate congres-\nsional committees’’ means the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on the Armed Services, the Committee on Home-land Security, the Committee on the Judici-ary, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representa-tives and the Committee on Foreign Rela-tions, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland Security and Gov-ernmental Affairs, the Committee on the Ju-diciary, and the Select Committee on Intel-ligence of the Senate. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to the rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. R\nOYCE ) and the gen-\ntleman from New York (Mr. E NGEL ) \neach will control 20 minutes. \nThe Chair recognizes the gentleman \nfrom California. \nGENERAL LEAVE \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan-\nimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and ex-tend their remarks and to include any extraneous material for the R\nECORD . \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there \nobjection to the request of the gen-tleman from California? \nThere was no objection. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield my-\nself such time as I may consume. \nMr. Speaker, I rise today in strong \nsupport of this legislation, H.R. 3654. It is entitled the Combat Terrorist Use of \nSocial Media Act of 2015. \nI want to recognize the leadership of \nJudge T\nEDPOE, a Member of this body, \non this critical issue. \nThe threats posed by Islamist terror-\nists have evolved, but the administra-tion’s policies have not evolved. If we are going to prevent additional at-tacks, then the President must lay out a broad, overarching strategy needed to win. That strategy must include a plan to counter terrorists’ use of social media. \nTerrorists are skillfully exploiting \nsocial media to recruit supporters, to radicalize, to raise money, to spread fear. Two weeks ago in San Bernardino, California, 14 innocent people were killed, and 21 people were injured by radical Islamist terrorists. We know these extremists—husband and wife— used social media, with one of them making a pledge on Facebook in sup-port of ISIS. This pledge was identified by Facebook and was taken down im-mediately. Yesterday, it was revealed that the \nU.S. Department of Homeland Security actually prohibited immigration offi-cials from reviewing the social media postings of all foreign citizens who were applying for U.S. visas and that they only intermittently began looking at posts from some visa applicants. So imagine a situation in which you have people who are going to Syria, who are posting on social media, and you have a blanket prohibition on reviewing those social media postings. That was the state of the situation as we were trying to defend the homeland. \nFrankly, the failure of this adminis-\ntration to incorporate a review of so-cial media posts into the visa approval process is absurd. Ignoring the online statements of terrorists who are trying to enter the United States puts our country at risk. This must fixed. \nThis bill, frankly, is timely; it is im-\nportant; and it forces the administra-tion to put forward a strategy to com-bat terrorists’ use of this social media. In 2011, the President promised to cre-ate that strategy, but he never deliv-ered anything. We are, simply, not going to defeat ISIS or other terrorist groups without combating their social media recruiting. \nFollowing a bipartisan letter from \nRepresentatives P\nOEof Texas, E NGEL , \nSHERMAN , and myself last March, Twit-\nter strengthened its policies to assert that statements threatening or pro-moting terrorism were against Twit-ter’s terms of service. Most of the other social media companies have similar user guidelines that prohibit threats of violence and the use of their platforms by terrorists. \nWe need a strategy that clearly ar-\nticulates our country’s goals, the re-sponsibilities of each Federal agency, what role each one will play, a vision of how our government is going to work with the private sector, and a vi-sion of how we are going to pull civil society into this effort. Without a strategy, the administration’s effort to combat terrorists’ use of social media appears to be disconnected, and it ap-pears to be ineffective. \nThen, of course, after we have that \nstrategy, we are going to need action. It is ironic that extremist groups have turned to Twitter, to Facebook, and to YouTube in order to encourage attacks on a free society when these companies would not have been created without there having been a free society, one which upholds free speech, free thought, and encourages entrepreneur-ship. \nMr. Speaker, it is imperative that \nthe administration lays out how we will contend with these terrorists in their hijacking of the social network for their twisted purposes. We truly have, basically, a caliphate today on the Internet—a virtual caliphate, if you will, on the Internet. This bill by Judge T\nEDPOEis intended to force a \nstrategy to solve this problem. \nI reserve the balance of my time. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:43 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.011 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9315 December 15, 2015 \nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES , PER-\nMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON IN-\nTELLIGENCE , \nDecember 10, 2015. \nHon. E DROYCE , \nChairman, House Committee on Foreign Affairs. \nD\nEAR CHAIRMAN ROYCE : On December 9, \n2015, your committee ordered H.R. 3654, the ‘‘Combat Terrorist Use of Social Media Act of 2015,’’ reported. \nAs you know, H.R. 3654 contains provisions \nwithin the jurisdiction of the Permanent Se-lect Committee on Intelligence. On the basis of your consultations with the Committee and in order to expedite the House’s consid-eration of the bill, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence will not assert a jurisdictional claim over the bill by seeking a sequential referral. This courtesy is, how-ever, conditioned on our mutual under-standing and agreement that it will in no way diminish or alter the jurisdiction of the Permanent Select Committee with respect to the appointment of conferees or to any fu-ture jurisdictional claim over the subject matter contained in the bill or any similar legislation. \nI would appreciate your response to this \nletter confirming this understanding and would request that you include a copy of this letter and your response in the committee report for the bill and in the Congressional Record during floor its consideration. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. \nSincerely, \nD\nEVIN NUNES , \nChairman. \nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES , \nCOMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS , \nWashington, DC, December 11, 2015. \nHon. D EVIN NUNES , \nChairman, Permanent Select Committee on In-\ntelligence. \nDEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : Thank you for con-\nsulting with the Committee on Foreign Af-fairs on H.R. 3654, the Combat Terrorist Use of Social Media Act of 2015, and for agreeing to forgo seeking a sequential referral of that bill to the House Permanent Select Com-mittee on Intelligence. \nI agree that your forgoing further action \non this measure does not in any way dimin-ish or alter the jurisdiction of your Com-mittee, or prejudice its jurisdictional prerog-atives on this bill or similar legislation in the future. I would support your effort to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this legislation. \nI will seek to place our letters on H.R. 3564 \ninto the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation and look forward to continuing to work with your Committee as this measure moves through the legislative process. \nSincerely, \nE\nDWARD R. R OYCE , \nChairman. \nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES , \nCOMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY , \nWashington, DC, December 11, 2015. \nHon. E DROYCE , \nChairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs. \nD\nEARCHAIRMAN ROYCE : I am writing with \nrespect to H.R. 3654, the ‘‘Combat Terrorist Use of Social Media Act of 2015,’’ which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and in addition to the Committee on the Ju-diciary. As a result of your having consulted with us on provisions in H.R. 3654 that fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Com-mittee on the Judiciary, I agree to discharge our Committee from further consideration of this bill so that it may proceed expeditiously \nto the House floor for consideration. \nThe Judiciary Committee takes this action \nwith our mutual understanding that by fore-going consideration of H.R. 3654 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over subject matter contained in this or similar legisla-tion, and that our Committee will be appro-priately consulted and involved as this bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues in our jurisdiction. Our Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appro-priate number of conferees to any House- Senate conference involving this or similar legislation, and asks that you support any such request. \nI would appreciate a response to this letter \nconfirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 3654, and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be in-cluded in the Congressional Record during Floor consideration of H.R. 3654. \nSincerely, \nB\nOBGOODLATTE , \nChairman. \nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES , \nCOMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS , \nWashington, DC, December 11, 2015. \nHon. B OBGOODLATTE , \nChairman, House Committee on the Judiciary. \nD\nEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : Thank you for con-\nsulting with the Committee on Foreign Af-fairs on H.R. 3654, the Combat Terrorist Use of Social Media Act of 2015, and for agreeing to be discharged from further consideration of that bill. \nI agree that your forgoing further action \non this measure does not in any way dimin-ish or alter the jurisdiction of the Com-mittee on the Judiciary, or prejudice its ju-risdictional prerogatives on this bill or simi-lar legislation in the future. I would support your effort to seek appointment of an appro-priate number of conferees to any House- Senate conference involving this legislation. \nI will seek to place our letters on H.R. 3564 \ninto the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation and look forward to continuing to work with your Committee as this measure moves through the legislative process. \nSincerely, \nE\nDWARD R. R OYCE , \nChairman. \nMr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield my-\nself such time as I may consume. \nI rise in support of this measure that \nwould push back against the use of so-cial media by terrorist groups. \nLet me start by thanking Congress-\nman P\nOEof Texas for introducing this \nlegislation. I am very glad to be an original cosponsor. I want to thank Congressman S\nHERMAN for his hard \nwork, and I want to thank, of course, our chairman, Chairman R\nOYCE . This is \na real bipartisan, important, strong measure. \nI think we need to be using every \ntool at our disposal to meet the chal-lenge posed by ISIS and other terrorist groups, and this bill will help us to meet them on the virtual battlefield, which is where they have been having such great success—on social media. Anyone who has looked at the situa-tion over the past months or years knows that the one major difference is social media. Social media, of course, riles up jihadists and also enables them to surreptitiously communicate in \nterms of plotting terrorist attacks. We have to be one step ahead of them, and we cannot let them be one step ahead of us. \nThat is why legislation like this is so \nimportant. I cannot think of a conflict in the past in which our enemies have been able to broadcast such horrific de-pictions of destruction and bloodshed, like we are seeing from ISIS. We all know the images of Mohammed Emwazi, who was known as Jihadi John, as he brutally murdered innocent people. Those videos spread across the Internet with staggering speed, show-ing everyone in the world the threat that ISIS posed and the tactics ISIS fighters were willing to use. Fortu-nately, the administration’s efforts succeeded in taking him out, but we know there are far too many who are waiting to take his place. \nISIS isn’t just using social media to \nfoment fear and panic. ISIS and other groups have taken full advantage of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other platforms to spread their violent ide-ology, to recruit new fighters, and to radicalize members of vulnerable and marginalized populations. For exam-ple, as more and more information comes out about the San Bernardino shooters, it is becoming clear that Tashfeen Malik used Facebook to con-vey her commitment to violent extre-mism to overseas contacts. \nWe need to find a way to deal with \nthis challenge on social media without violating free expression or privacy concerns. It is going to require creative thinking, but I am confident that we can do it. We have to do it. We don’t have a choice but to do it. We have al-ready taken some steps. I worked with Chairman R\nOYCE and with Representa-\ntives P OEof Texas and S HERMAN to \npush Twitter to make it easier for users to report recruitment efforts. This is a small step to help with one of the tools that ISIS is using, but they are constantly evolving, and we need to keep looking for ways to push back. \nThat is where this legislation comes \nin. This bill would require the adminis-tration to devise a strategy to combat terrorists’ use of social media and to foster greater collaboration between government and private sector compa-nies to help identify and stop terrorist activities online. Again, we need to look for every advantage possible in taking the fight to ISIS. This bill would help us push back on one of the ways ISIS has achieved such a global reach. \nAgain, I commend Mr. P\nOEof Texas \nfor his tireless efforts in bringing in legislation to the floor. I commend the chairman as well and Mr. S\nHERMAN . I \nsupport this measure, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. \nI reserve the balance of my time. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 \nminutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. P\nOE), the author of this bill and \nthe chairman of the Foreign Affairs \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:43 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE7.007 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9316 December 15, 2015 \nSubcommittee on Terrorism, Non-\nproliferation, and Trade. \nMr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I \nwant to thank Representative S HER-\nMAN, on the other side, for cospon-\nsoring this legislation; and I want to thank Chairman R\nOYCE and Chairman \nENGEL for being original cosponsors of \nthis bill. \nMr. Speaker, this is another piece of \nlegislation that has come out of the Foreign Affairs Committee—bipar-tisan, unanimously voted on, and ap-proved by the Foreign Affairs Com-mittee, as much of our legislation is. \nMr. Speaker, I also want to thank \nthree staffers who have worked on the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-proliferation, and Trade—Luke Murry, Oren Adaki, and Jeff Dressler, who now works with the majority leader’s staff. These three individuals know more about terrorism, I think, than any three people on the Hill, and I want to thank them for their work not only on this bill but on legislation in general. \nAs has been said, Mr. Speaker, ter-\nrorists’ use of social media has ex-ploded over the last several years. A re-cent study by The Brookings Institute found that ISIS now uses 40,000 Twitter accounts. Terrorists use social media to do the following: to recruit others, to raise money, to spread propaganda, and to even train future fighters. \nThis legislation deals with foreign \nterrorist organizations. We are not talking about a person who claims to be a terrorist or who we think is a ter-rorist. It is specifically dealing with foreign terrorist organizations that are designated by our government. \nThe recipes for the bombs used at the \nBoston Marathon were in al Qaeda’s magazine, which was posted on social media before the attack. The al Qaeda affiliate al Shabaab live tweeted the attack on a Kenyan mall that killed 72 people. The al Qaeda branch in Yemen, known as AQAP, which is another ter-rorist organization, held a press con-ference on Twitter, allowing users to submit questions that were then an-swered by AQAP and were posted back on Twitter the following week—a con-ference call by terrorists. In October, ISIS issued a new instruction manual on how terrorists can use social media. Today, wannabe terrorists don’t have to go to the battlefield—to Syria—to get trained. They can get trained on-line—like receiving college credits—on how to be a terrorist and on how to be a fighter. \nNationwide, the FBI is currently in-\nvestigating 900 potential lone wolf ter-rorists in the United States. The Inter-net and social media serve as their playbook to carry out attacks. Since March of 2014, 71 people in the United States have been charged with crimes related to ISIS. \nb1615 \nTheir backgrounds are very different, \nbut nearly all of them had spent time online voicing their support for ISIS. Later, they were arrested after their online posts drew some attention by \nthe FBI. \nIn 2011, as the chairman has said, the \nadministration released a report on countering violent extremists that rec-ognized that online radicalization was a growing problem. The administration promised a strategy of how we can deal with this. Four years later, unfortu-nately, we don’t have a strategy, and we don’t have a plan. This is a problem because individual agencies are making their own unilateral decisions. \nThis week, we learned that the De-\npartment of Homeland Security did not review the social media posts of Tashfeen Malik, who was granted a fiancee visa, but posted her radical views on social media prior to obtain-ing the visa. \nThe State Department does not know \nhow to effectively counter terrorist messaging because it does not have the expertise of the intelligence commu-nity. The intelligence community ap-proaches social media as a ‘‘capture ev-erything’’ because it has not been made clear what it can do and what it cannot do. The FBI does not know how far it should push social media companies to prohibit them from allowing terrorist organizations’ content on their sites. \nSo we must have a comprehensive \nstrategy before we can effectively de-feat the enemy on the cyber battle-field. Mr. Speaker, all U.S. depart-ments really must be singing the same song on the same page in the hymnal about how to defeat foreign terrorist organizations that use social media— American social media companies. \nI will say this: Facebook has done a \nfairly decent job of bringing down ter-rorist sites, and Facebook has seen a drop in the number of terrorists that try to use their site, but not all social media companies have been as respon-sive to terrorism. \nMr. Speaker, we already have tech-\nnology that is used to make sure that child pornography is not posted online. Thanks to Hany Farid, the chairman of the computer science department at Dartmouth College, who invented a technology that is used with Microsoft. He said that we can use that same pro-tocol that we do to bring down child pornography to bring down social media sites that deal with foreign ter-rorist organizations’ propaganda and their spreading of murder. Here is what he said: \n‘‘There’s no fundamental technology \nor engineering limitation. This is a business or policy decision. Unless the companies have decided that they just can’t be bothered.’’ \nSo that is his opinion on how we can \nuse this same protocol. This can be done. We can use the same protocol, and we can bring down those foreign terrorist organization sites. \nThis is not a free speech issue—that \nhas been discussed, and some are con-cerned about that—because we are dealing specifically with foreign ter-rorist organizations. The Supreme Court has already ruled regarding that issue in 2010 in Holder v. Humanitarian \nLaw Project that a foreign terrorist or-ganization does not have constitu-tional rights in the United States under the First Amendment. So this is not a problem. \nIn this 21st century fight against ter-\nrorists who are sophisticated and tech savvy, we have to defeat these organi-zations on all the battlefields: over-seas, over here, and online. \nAnd that is just the way it is. Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I reserve \nthe balance of my time. \nMr. ROYCE. I yield 3 minutes to the \ngentlewoman from Florida (Ms. R\nOS- \nLEHTINEN ), the chair of the Foreign Af-\nfairs’ Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa. \nMs. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I \nthank the chairman and the ranking member, who lead this committee in such an able, expert manner and in a bipartisan way. I thank especially the author of this important resolution, one of our subcommittee chairmen, T\nEDPOE. \nI rise in strong support of Judge \nPOE’s bill, the Combat Terrorist Use of \nSocial Media Act. I urge all of my col-leagues to support this important measure. \nExtremist groups like ISIS are well- \nknown for their extensive use of social media, spreading their hateful ide-ology, inciting violence, and attempt-ing to recruit susceptible individuals to their hateful and twisted cause. \nWhen we hear reports and statistics \nthat we have heard today—like ISIS having over 40,000 Twitter accounts or that there are an estimated 200,000 pro- ISIS social media posts per day—clear-ly, more needs to be done. These jihadists have become more and more tech savvy and are more adept at ma-nipulating the tools of social media. Yet we in the United States lack any comprehensive strategy to counter their perverted ideology via social media. \nAs Judge P\nOEhas very ably argued, \nthe administration could be stopping pro-extremists’ social media in much the same way that we now stop online child pornography. ISIS and other for-eign terrorist organizations do not have free speech rights under American law. \nNow, we were all shocked, as you \nheard today, that our very own Depart-ment of Homeland Security main-tained a policy that prevented the screening of visa applicants’ social media accounts because we worried about bad public relations; we worried about intrusions into their privacy, even though social media posts, by their very definition, are exactly that, reaching out to the public through so-cial manners, meaning through public ways. \nEvery pro-ISIS post or any post by \nany other foreign terrorist organiza-tion that uses Facebook, YouTube, or Twitter, every one that we are able to take down before action is being taken is one less chance for these extremists \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.013 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9317 December 15, 2015 \nto recruit and spread their vicious \npropaganda, and the administration needs to start getting serious about stopping it. \nThis bill will require the administra-\ntion to provide Congress—and, there-fore, the American public—with a strategy to fight Islamic extremists’ use of social media, as well as require that the administration give us a pol-icy that enhances the collaboration be-tween the Federal Government and so-cial media companies so that we can counter this troubling and dangerous threat. \nI applaud Judge P\nOEfor introducing \nthis bill. I thank our esteemed chair-man and ranking member for bringing it to the floor in such a speedy manner. \nI offer my full support, and I urge all \nof my colleagues to do the same. \nMr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, every day \nISIS is working to bring new fighters into its ranks, recruiting candidates from South Asia, from France, the U.K., and right here in the United States. ISIS is able to cast such a wide net because they are taking full advan-tage of social media. We need to take this tool out of their hands, even as we press forward with our partners to fight ISIS on the battlefield. \nThis legislation will enable us to \nwork more closely with social media companies and put together a strategy to meet this challenge. \nAgain, I want to commend my friend, \nJudge P\nOE. \nI urge a ‘‘yes’’ vote on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gen-\ntleman from Texas (Mr. P\nOE), you are \nright: ‘‘That is just the way it is.’’ \nI yield back the balance of my time. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, again, it \nwas revealed yesterday that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security ac-tually prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media post-ings of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas and only sporadically began looking at posts from some visa appli-cants. \nThe failure to incorporate a review of \nsocial media posts into the visa ap-proval process is absurd. Ignoring the online statements of those terrorists trying to enter the United States puts our country at risk. This must be fixed. \nDestroying ISIS will require deter-\nmined leadership. It is going to require Presidential leadership. And the Presi-dent must use his authority as Com-mander in Chief to lead this fight to destroy ISIS—not to contain it—to de-stroy ISIS and other extremist groups. \nSo it has been said that a virtual ca-\nliphate awash in hate and propaganda exists online. Yet U.S. Government ef-forts in this area are failing. A strat-egy to combat terrorist use of social media is one of many measures the ad-ministration must develop so we can win the fight. Promised in 2011, this strategy is overdue. \nWith this bill, Congress is demanding \nthat the administration deliver its strategy so that the Federal agencies can effectively prevent terrorists from using social media to spread hate, fear, \nand violence. \nI again want to recognize my col-\nleagues Representative P\nOEof Texas \nand Representative E NGEL of New York \nfor their leadership on this measure, which I encourage all the Members of this House to support. \nI yield back the balance of my time, \nMr. Speaker. \nMs. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank \nmy colleague, Congressman T\nEDPOEfrom \nTexas for his work on H.R. 3654, Combatting Terrorists’ Use of Social Media Act of 2015. \nThe proliferation of terrorism is an existential \nthreat to our homeland greater than ever be-fore because of the viral spread of extremism on the world-wide web. \nThe challenge before us is balancing civil \nliberties such as freedom of speech with our national security interests. \nVarious social media platforms are being \nutilized by Daesh leaders and their affiliates across the globe to reach, engage and radicalize—instantly and for free. \nOne only needs to view the gruesome prop-\naganda videos put online by Daesh with evoc-ative music, clearly edited to inspire violence with imagery that conjures an ‘‘us vs. them’’ emotion. \nThe world-wide web was intended as a plat-\nform to share productive and creative knowl-edge and ideas. \nThe sensory impact of the violent propa-\nganda video is so powerful that a powerful counter-narrative is imperative. \nThrough its online campaign, Daesh in-\nstantly gains access to vulnerable and impres-sionable minds, whether teenagers going through teenage angst or unemployed edu-cated women and men who have limited eco-nomic prospects and feel disenfranchised from society. \nSo what we have is a me ´lange of Daesh re-\ncruits, copycats and wannabes all inspired vis a vis the worldwide web, ready to carry on and die for an ideology they don’t fully grasp its gravity on them and their future. \nThe evidence of this is tens of thousands of \nforeign fighters from all over the world who have left their homes and joined Daesh in Iraq and Syria. \nBut then we also have those who do not \neven leave the comforts of their homes in car-rying out their crimes. \nPart of what our government and govern-\nments across the globe must do is to fight back by cutting off terrorist bank accounts, Twitter, Facebook, Google and other social media accounts. \nWhereas money is the currency for compen-\nsating Daesh’s recruits, social media is being utilized as a currency and tool for engaging and brainwashing these recruits. \nI commend our powerful military’s might and \nprofessionalism of neutralizing Abu Salah who has been described as one of the most senior and experienced members of Daesh’s finan-cial network and in fact has been referred to as the organization’s finance minister. \nI hope that our friends in Silicon Valley and \nthe tech industry will join us in our fight against Daesh with their genius as we con-tinue our collective efforts of addressing the role that social media will play in defeating en-emies of the peace on the traditional battle-field as well as on the contemporary battlefield of the web. The past few months have been marked by \nsenseless threats or actual violence and trag-edy across the globe from the most recent de-tails of the threat triggering the Los Angeles Public School District shut down, to the San Bernardino shootings, to Boko Haram attacks in Nigeria, shootings in Bamako, Mali, at the Bartaclan Theatre and other social venues in Paris, to attacks in Beirut, Lebanon and the downing of a plane claiming innocent lives of Egyptians and Russians. \nViolent extremism cannot be the ‘‘new-nor-\nmal’’ in our nation and in our world. \nTo combat the scourge of violent extremism, \nand make sure this is not our ‘‘new normal’’ it is important that we adapt to the capabilities of adversaries of peace through a multipronged approach, which is why I support H.R. 3654. \nSpecifically, this bill requires the President \nto transmit to Congress a report on U.S. strat-egy to combat terrorists’ and terrorist organi-zations’ use of social media. \nThis bill is in tandem with the President’s \ncomprehensive strategy to counter terrorists’ and terrorist organizations’ use of social media, encapsulated in the President’s 2011 Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States. \nAmong other things, the President’s robust \nplan seeks to protect our communities from violent extremist recruitment and radicalization. \nThis is a top national security priority for the \nAdministration and those of us here in Con-gress. \nThe President’s strategic plan and H.R. \n3654 facilitate the creation of a report which will enable our country in our efforts at com-batting violent extremism through: evaluation of the role social media plays in radicalization in the United States and across the globe; analysis of how terrorists and terrorist organi-zations are using social media; recommenda-tions to improve the federal government’s ef-forts to disrupt and counter the use of social media by terrorists and terrorist organizations; a classified assessment of the intelligence value of terrorists’ social media posts; and a classified overview of training available to law enforcement and intelligence personnel to combat terrorists’ use of social media and rec-ommendations for improving or expanding ex-isting training opportunities. \nPart of what the Bill seeks to achieve is in-\nformation on our nation’s policy that enhances the exchange of information and dialogue be-tween the federal government and social media companies as it relates to the use of social media platforms by terrorists. \nFinally, among other things, the Bill also \ncalls for our updated comprehensive strategy to counter terrorists’ and terrorist organiza-tions’ use of social media, as committed to in the President’s 2011 Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Pre-vent Violent Extremism in the United States. \nAs a nation, we must work together, private \nand public sector to prevent all types of extre-mism regardless of who inspires it. \nAt the same time, countering ISIS, better to \nbe referred to as Daesh, Boko Haram, al- Qa’ida and other extremists’ violent ideologues requires our coordinated social media, intel-ligence sharing, law enforcement and commu-nity engagement strategy that will enable us to thwart violent extremism, saving many Amer-ican lives. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:58 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.014 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9318 December 15, 2015 \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nquestion is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. R\nOYCE ) that the House suspend the \nrules and pass the bill, H.R. 3654, as amended. \nThe question was taken. The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the \nopinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it. \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I object to \nthe vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 8 of rule XX, further pro-ceedings on this question will be post-poned. \nThe point of no quorum is considered \nwithdrawn. \nf \nSUPPORTING FREEDOM OF THE \nPRESS IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to \nsuspend the rules and agree to the reso-lution (H. Res. 536) supporting freedom of the press in Latin America and the Caribbean and condemning violations of press freedom and violence against journalists, bloggers, and individuals exercising their right to freedom of speech, as amended. \nThe Clerk read the title of the resolu-\ntion. \nThe text of the resolution is as fol-\nlows: \nH. R ES. 536 \nWhereas despite the strong tradition of \nindependent and critical media in many countries in Latin America and the Carib-bean, journalists in some countries are be-coming increasingly vulnerable to violence and government harassment; \nWhereas, on July 29, 2015, the Western \nHemisphere Subcommittee convened a hear-ing titled ‘‘Threats to Press Freedom in the Americas’’ and Carlos Lauria, Senior Amer-icas Program Coordinator at the Committee to Protect Journalists stated that ‘‘Scores of journalists have been killed and disappeared. Media outlets have been bombed and forced into censorship. . . . Censorship due to vio-lence in Latin America has reached one of its highest points since most of the region was dominated by military rule more than three decades ago.’’; \nWhereas in 2014, Cuban authorities de-\ntained 1,817 members of civil society, 31 of whom were independent journalists; \nWhereas in Cuba, independent journalists \nface sustained harassment, including deten-tion and physical abuse from the Castro re-gime; \nWhereas in Ecuador, in September 2015, the \ngovernment took steps to close the sole press freedom monitoring organization, Fundamedios, for exceeding its corporate charter, but the government relented in the face of international criticism and potential economic reprisals; \nWhereas in the country, forced corrections \nby the government have become a means of institutional censorship; \nWhereas according to the Committee to \nProtect Journalists, Mexico is one of the most dangerous countries in the world for the press; \nWhereas in Mexico, over 50 journalists \nhave been killed or have disappeared since 2007, at least 11 reporters have been killed since 2011, 4 of them in direct reprisal for \ntheir work; \nWhereas according to the Committee to \nProtect Journalists, at least 4 journalists have been killed in Brazil in 2015, many times after being tortured and having their bodies mutilated; \nWhereas Evany Jose ´Metzker, a political \nblogger in the state of Minas Gerais who had been investigating a child prostitution ring, was found decapitated outside the town of Padre Paraı ´so; \nWhereas according to the Organization of \nAmerican States (OAS) 2014 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human rights, journalists covering protests in Venezuela were subject to assaults, ob-struction, detention, raids, threats, censor-ship orders, and confiscation or destruction of equipment; \nWhereas, on April 21, 2015, a lawsuit within \nthe 29th District Tribunal of the Metropoli-tan area of Caracas charged the journal El Nacional and its Chief Editor Miguel Henrique Otero for ‘‘reproducing false infor-mation’’ and was forced to flee Venezuela; \nWhereas the Honduran national human \nrights commissioner reported that 8 journal-ists and social communicators were killed as of September, compared with 3 in 2013, and dozens of cases in which journalists reported being victims of threats and persecution; \nWhereas according to the OAS 2014 Annual \nReport of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Members of the media and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) stat-ed the press ‘‘self-censored’’ due to fear of re-prisal from organized crime or corrupt gov-ernment officials; \nWhereas in Colombia, there were 98 inci-\ndents of violence and harassment against journalists, 30 were physically attacked, and 45 were victims of harassment or intimida-tion due to their reporting; \nWhereas members of illegal armed groups \nsought to inhibit freedom of expression by intimidating, threatening, kidnapping, and killing journalists; \nWhereas national and international NGOs \nreported that local media representatives regularly practiced self-censorship because \nof threats of violence from these groups; \nWhereas according to the OAS 2014 Annual \nReport of the Inter-American Commission on Human rights, throughout 2014, Guatemala presented accounts of cases of harassment and the filing of several criminal complaints against a newspaper that criticized the Ad-ministration; \nWhereas according to the Department of \nState’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2014 in Nicaragua, the govern-ment continued to use direct and indirect means to pressure and seek to close inde-pendent radio stations, allegedly for polit-ical reasons; \nWhereas according to the Department of \nState’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2014 in Argentina, a survey re-leased of 830 journalists throughout the country indicated 53 percent of respondents worked for a media outlet that self-censored content; and \nWhereas almost half the journalists sur-\nveyed said they self-censored in their report-ing on the national government: Now, there-fore, be it \nResolved, That the House of Representa-\ntives— \n(1) supports a free press in Latin America \nand the Caribbean and condemns violations of press freedom and violence against jour-nalists; \n(2) urges countries in the region to imple-\nment recommendations from the Organiza-tion of American States’ Office of the Spe-cial Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression to its Member States; (3) urges countries in Latin America and \nthe Caribbean to be vocal in condemning vio-lations of press freedom, violence against journalists, and the culture of impunity that leads to self-censorship; \n(4) urges countries in the Western Hemi-\nsphere to uphold the principles outlined in the Inter-American Democratic Charter and urges their neighbors in the region to stand by the charter they are a party to; and \n(5) urges the United States Agency for \nInternational Development and the Depart-ment of State to assist, when appropriate, the media in closed societies to promote an open and free press. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to the rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. R\nOYCE ) and the gen-\ntleman from New York (Mr. E NGEL ) \neach will control 20 minutes. \nThe Chair recognizes the gentleman \nfrom California. \nGENERAL LEAVE \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan-\nimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any ex-traneous material in the R\nECORD . \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there \nobjection to the request of the gen-tleman from California? \nThere was no objection. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield my-\nself such time as I may consume. \nMr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring \nforward this resolution, introduced by my friend and colleague, the gen-tleman from New Jersey (Mr. S\nIRES), \non the important issue of press freedom in the Western Hemisphere. \nFreedom of the press is the corner-\nstone of democracy. It is our obligation to promote and protect this funda-mental right, particularly here in our own hemisphere. \nUndoubtedly, Mr. Speaker, we have \nseen a troubling erosion of these rights in several parts of the Western Hemi-sphere at the hands of authoritarian, populist leaders, as well as violence against journalists by transnational narcotics trafficking organizations. \nIn Ecuador, President Correa silences \ndiscourse and dissent by intimidating and censoring the media. Hefty fines are issued for any reporting unfavor-able to him or his policies. \nIn Mexico, narcotics traffickers in-\ntimidate the press and violently target journalists to silence those journalists. \nIn Cuba, despite the administration’s \nnaive rapprochement, a lack of free ex-pression is underscored by the contin-ued political imprisonment of anyone who dares to speak or write against the Castro dictatorship. \nThis resolution is an important dem-\nonstration of our support for the funda-mental right to freedom of speech and our belief that regional leaders in the Organization of American States need to do more to condemn what, in some parts of the region, has become the sys-temic violation of press freedom. The United States must stand with brave journalists who are on the front lines of exposing corruption in government. \nEarlier this year, Chairman D\nUNCAN ’s \nSubcommittee on the Western Hemi-sphere held a hearing on threats to \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.015 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9319 December 15, 2015 \npress freedom in the Americas. One \nwitness told the committee that there is now a growing regional trend of gov-ernment persecution and harassment of journalists, as well as an increase in violent attacks carried out by state and nonstate actors with near com-plete immunity. \nI applaud Mr. S\nIRES and the chair-\nman emeritus of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Ms. R\nOS-LEHTINEN , for in-\ntroducing this resolution and all who champion freedom of expression as a fundamental part of a vibrant, demo-cratic tradition. \nI reserve the balance of my time. Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield my-\nself such time as I may consume. \nI rise in strong support of H. Res. 536. I want to congratulate my friend \nfrom New Jersey (Mr. S\nIRES), who is \nthe driving force behind this resolu-tion, and my friend from Florida (Ms. R\nOS-LEHTINEN ), who has cosponsored \nthis resolution. The two of them have really worked very, very hard through the years to raise this issue, and it is good that we are taking up this meas-ure now. \nb1630 \nHere in the United States we know \nthat a free and open press is the cor-nerstone of a strong democracy. We count on the press to hold leaders ac-countable and shine a light on the challenges facing our country. The work of a free press goes hand in hand with the representative government we practice in this Chamber. \nAs government officials, we have tre-\nmendous respect for our friends in the so-called fourth estate. So it is espe-cially troubling when we see govern-ments right here in our hemisphere try to silence this critical institution. \nOn May 1, World Press Freedom Day, \nPresident Obama said ‘‘in too many places around the world, a free press is under attack by governments that want to avoid the truth or mistrust the ability of citizens to make their own decisions.’’ \nUnfortunately, that threat to press \nfreedom is particularly acute right here in our own hemisphere. That is why I am so glad, as I mentioned be-fore, that my friends, Mr. S\nIRES, rank-\ning member of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, and Ms. R\nOS- \nLEHTINEN , the subcommittee’s former \nchair, introduced this measure con-demning violations of press freedom and violence against journalists in Latin America and the Caribbean. \nMr. S\nIRES and Ms. R OS-LEHTINEN are \nleaders on the Western Hemisphere in our Congress and are never shy to speak up when individuals’ rights are in danger. I used to be the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere; so, I have seen this prob-lem firsthand. \nHere in the Americas, leaders often \nspeak out when electoral democracy is at risk. That is great. But, unfortu-nately, those leaders fall silent when it comes to the more subtle challenges to democracy, particularly violations of \npress freedom. \nWe saw it earlier this year when the \nEcuadorian Government threatened to close down a press freedom monitoring organization known as Fundamedios. Chairman R\nOYCE and I joined many in \nthe international community in con-demning this effort. Fortunately, President Correa relented in the face of international condemnation. \nStill, attacks on press freedom in Ec-\nuador are a daily problem, creating a hostile environment for journalists trying to do their jobs. A 2013 commu-nications law put in place fines and sanctions for the press. So it is no sur-prise that Freedom House rated Ecua-dor’s press as not free this year. The list goes on and on. \nIn Venezuela, journalists have been \ntargeted by politically motivated law-suits. That is why it is such a miracle, what we saw this past week or so with the Venezuelan elections. \nDespite the harassment, despite the \nlack of press freedom, despite going after people who would raise the truth, the Venezuelan people weren’t fooled and voted overwhelmingly against the current oppressive regime. \nThat is good. It is good to see. But we \nneed to make sure that free press real-ly exists not only in places like Ven-ezuela, but in Cuba, where the govern-ment has rounded up and detained independent journalists just for report-ing the reality on the ground. Just for reporting the truth in Cuba, you get rounded up and detained. \nIn Mexico, drug trafficking organiza-\ntions have brutally murdered many of those who report on their violent ac-tivities. Just last week, the editor of a Mexican newspaper called El Manana explained to The Washington Post that submitting to drug traffickers’ de-mands is the only way to stay alive. He said: ‘‘You do it or you die, and nobody wants to die. Self-censorship—that’s our shield.’’ And in Colombia and Hon-duras, journalism remains a dangerous profession. \nThis resolution underscores these \nabuses and the scourge of violence against journalists. It reaffirms the im-portant role a free press plays in open societies, and it urges these govern-ments in the region to do much more to provide protection to those journal-ists under threat. \nI urge my colleagues to join me in \nsupporting this resolution. I again compliment Mr. S\nIRES and Ms. R OS- \nLEHTINEN . \nMr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of \nmy time. \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 \nminutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. R\nOS-LEHTINEN ), chair of \nthe Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the primary co-sponsor of this resolution. \nMs. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I \nthank the chairman of our committee, again, the gentleman from California (Mr. R\nOYCE ), and the ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. \nENGEL ), for bringing this important \nresolution to the floor in such a speedy manner. \nI want to thank my dear friend, my \nlegislative brother, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. S\nIRES), for bring-\ning forward House Resolution 536, which is a resolution to support free-dom of the press in Latin America and the Caribbean and condemning viola-tions of press freedoms and violence against journalists, bloggers, and indi-viduals who are exercising their right to freedom of speech. I am honored to be the Republican lead on Mr. S\nIRES’ \nresolution. \nBasic freedoms are being threatened \nall over Latin America, Mr. Speaker, by rogue regimes that seek to quash dissenters in any way that they can. \nEarlier this year we held a sub-\ncommittee hearing, as the chairman pointed out, on this very subject of the threat to press freedom. Carlos Ponce of Freedom House stated that, when it comes to press freedom, only three countries in Latin America were rated free by this organization. \nCan you imagine that, Mr. Speaker? \nOut of all of the countries in Latin America, only three could be labeled as free when it comes to freedom of the press. \nMore and more, we see countries like \nVenezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Cuba taking steps to muzzle broadcast and print media into submission, leav-ing journalists and editors no choice but to self-censor their very own con-tent. \nVenezuela’s 2004 Ley de \nResponsabilidad Social en Radio y Tel-evision, or Law of Social Responsi-bility in Radio and Television, has pro-vided the legal framework to quash and censor the press, and its provisions have been replicated by Ecuador and other countries in the region. \nDue to the provisions in this law, tel-\nevision stations and newspapers have been bullied by the regime or forced to sell their outlets. In the case of RCTV, broadcasts were suspended by the Ven-ezuelan regime. \nOwners of Globovision and El Uni-\nversal, both critical of the regime, were forced to sell their outlets to business interests with close ties to the regime. \nEcuador faces equally daunting chal-\nlenges to press freedoms. A large num-ber of journalists are being sued. Watchdogs such as Fundamedios are being harassed constantly. Newspapers such as El Universo are being fined for running articles that are not in agree-ment with the regime. \nIn Nicaragua, the Ortega regime has \nalso restricted media outlets by mak-ing it difficult for journalists to oper-ate. With the recent promulgation by the Law of Sovereign Security, it has nearly ensured a muzzle on all report-ers. \nFormer President Cristina Kirchner \nof Argentina and her court often de-monize journalists and charge popular media outlets, such as El Grupo Clarin \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.016 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9320 December 15, 2015 \nor the daily Ultima Hora, with inciting \ncollective violence and terrorizing the population. These are actual charges. \nMexico, one of our closest allies in \nthe region, is one of the most dan-gerous countries for journalists. This year alone, six journalists were killed in direct connection to their jour-nalism work. \nIn my native country of Cuba, de-\nspite the misguided normalization ef-fort by the Obama administration, the Castro regime continues to hold total control of information. There is no free press in Cuba. Foreign media outlets usually censor their own information because they don’t want to be kicked out of the country. \nLast week, Mr. Speaker, I had the \nhonor of meeting a Cuban artist here in Washington, D.C., known as El Sexto, the sixth one. He was jailed for nearly a year for announcing that he would take part in a performance art that criticized the Communist regime lead-ers. \nThe mere announcement was enough \nto be jailed for almost a year. Citizen journalists who defy the Castro broth-ers on the island are regularly subject to death threats, arbitrary arrests, beatings, and torture by the repression apparatus of the regime. \nMr. Speaker, this is a critical time \nfor basic freedoms in our hemisphere. Free and independent media are instru-ments to fight against the scornful, ty-rannical regimes that plague our hemi-sphere today. \nWe in the United States must remain \never vigilant amongst our friends and foes in this key moment in history for press freedom and freedom of expres-sion in our region. \nThis vote today, Mr. Speaker, over-\nwhelmingly supporting efforts like the one spearheaded by our good friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. S\nIRES), is a good place in which to \nstart. \nI thank the chairman, ranking mem-\nber, and Mr. S IRES for their work on \nthis important topic. \nMr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 \nminutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. S\nIRES), the author of this \nresolution, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemi-sphere, a good friend, and a great mem-ber of the Committee on Foreign Af-fairs. \nMr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, I would like \nto thank Chairman R\nOYCE , Ranking \nMember E NGEL , and all the staff for \ntheir support in promoting democratic values around the world and in their ef-forts to bring this resolution to the floor. \nI also want to thank my good friend \nI\nLEANA ROS-LEHTINEN for serving as the \nRepublican lead on this legislation. I also want to recognize the leadership of my colleague, Chairman J\nEFFDUNCAN , \non this issue. \nFreedom of expression is the key to a \nthriving democracy. It is the number one tool to hold people and govern-ments accountable for their actions. In recent years, many organizations dedi-\ncated to freedom of speech and advanc-ing civil societies have been trying to bring attention to the deterioration of press freedom in parts of the Western Hemisphere, specifically in Latin America and the Caribbean. \nCuba has consistently been charac-\nterized as having one of the most re-pressive media environments in the world, with the Castro brothers con-trolling all aspects of the print and electronic media. \nVenezuela and Ecuador have harassed \nand fined the media, shut down press operations, and even physically at-tacked journalists who were trying to expose the state-sponsored crackdown against peaceful political dissenters. \nIn other countries, such as Mexico \nand Honduras, an increase in drug-re-lated violence and worsening security situations have created a culture of im-punity, allowing violence against jour-nalists and the press to go unpunished. \nAs a child in Cuba, I witnessed the \ndeterioration of democracy as the Cas-tro regime took over the island and systematically destroyed all aspects of freedom of speech and expression. There is a strong connection between the country’s democratic values and the freedom afforded to their press. \nWorking to preserve freedom of \nspeech and pushing back against those who seek to quiet dissenters should be a top priority when engaging our neighbors in the region. That is why I introduced H. Res. 536, a resolution condemning violations of press free-dom, violence against journalists, bloggers, and individuals exercising their right to freedom of speech. \nThis resolution condemns these vio-\nlations and urges countries in the re-gion to implement the recommenda-tion of member states made by the Or-ganization of American States, Office of Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression. \nThis resolution also urges our admin-\nistration to assist the media in closed societies to promote a free press. \nI urge my colleagues to support H. \nRes. 536 to help foster better protec-tions for the press around our hemi-sphere. \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve \nthe balance of my time. \nMr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, in closing, \nlet me say that today we are talking about a particular challenge facing the Western Hemisphere. But let me say that we have seen a great deal in the last few weeks that we should be opti-mistic about. \nAs I mentioned before, for example, \nvoters in Venezuela recently went to the ballot box to demand change. They did so in Argentina as well. So we see once again that, despite all of the chal-lenges in the hemisphere, electoral de-mocracy remains vibrant, but we have to keep working to keep it vibrant. \nBut, of course, elections alone are \nnot enough. We need to work in part-nership with our friends in the Amer-icas to ensure that every country has a robust democracy that includes a free \nand independent press. Most impor-tantly, countries must guarantee the safety of journalists, especially as they courageously report in dangerous places. \nI, again, thank Mr. S\nIRES and Ms. \nROS-LEHTINEN for introducing this im-\nportant resolution. I urge my col-leagues to support its passage. \nMr. Speaker, I yield back the balance \nof my time. \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield my-\nself such time as I may consume. \nMr. Speaker, I want to thank my col-\nleagues for their support of this resolu-tion, as well as the chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, Mr. D\nUNCAN , and, of course, the rank-\ning member, Mr. S IRES, the author of \nthis resolution before us today. I thank them for the work they have done on the committee to bring attention to the troubling attacks on a free press that have plagued the Western Hemi-sphere. \nMr. Speaker, as Thomas Jefferson \nwrote in 1816: ‘‘Where the press is free, and every man able to read, all is safe.’’ \nThis resolution is timely and impor-\ntant. I am proud of the work our com-mittee has done to promote and defend freedom of the press, which is, of course, the cornerstone of democratic principles. The United States should— and must—continue to do more to help defend free expression across the Amer-icas. \nMr. Speaker, I yield back the balance \nof my time. \nMr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, as a co-chair of \nthe House Caucus on the Freedom of the Press, I strongly support H. Res. 536 and its condemnation of violations of press freedom and violence against journalists, bloggers, and individuals exercising their right to freedom of speech across Latin America and the Carib-bean. Thomas Jefferson once said, ‘‘Our lib-erty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.’’ Those words ring true not only for our nation, but for all nations and all people dedicated to the ideals of democracy and committed to a democratic system of government. \nWhether through act and intimidation by the \ngovernment or non-state actors, the voices of journalists across Latin American and the Car-ibbean—voices raised to speak out against corruption, abuses of power, and criminal ac-\ntivity—are being silenced at an alarming rate. This cannot be allowed to continue. I com-mend the House of Representatives and the sponsors of this legislation for drawing atten-tion to this issue, and call on regional leaders to take all necessary steps to foster, protect, and defend the inherent right of their citizens to express themselves freely, publicly, and without fear of reprisal. Every time this right is violated, the foundations of society are weak-ened. We must all be vigilant and unrelenting in our support of free expression around the world. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nquestion is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. R\nOYCE ) that the House suspend the \nrules and agree to the resolution, H.R. 536, as amended. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.018 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9321 December 15, 2015 \nThe question was taken. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. In the \nopinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it. \nMr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, on that I \ndemand the yeas and nays. \nThe yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 8 of rule XX, further pro-ceedings on this motion will be post-poned. \nf \nRECESS \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until ap-proximately 6:30 p.m. today. \nAccordingly (at 4 o’clock and 45 min-\nutes p.m.), the House stood in recess. \nf \nb1830 \nAFTER RECESS \nThe recess having expired, the House \nwas called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. W\nOODALL ) at 6 o’clock \nand 30 minutes p.m. \nf \nANNOUNCEMENT BY COMMITTEE \nON RULES REGARDING AMEND-MENT PROCESS FOR H.R. 1155, H.R. 712, and H.R. 1927 \n(Mr. SESSIONS asked and was given \npermission to address the House for 1 minute.) \nMr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, today, \nthe Rules Committee issued three Dear Colleagues outlining the amendment processes for two packages: the Sun-shine for Regulations and Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2016 and the Fairness in Class Action Liti-gation and Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2015, as well as H.R. 1155, the SCRUB Act of 2015. \nThese bills are likely to come before \nthe House the first week back in Janu-ary 2016. Amendment deadlines have been set for next Tuesday, December 22. Bill text and more detailed informa-tion can be found on the Rules Com-mittee Web site. \nPlease feel free to contact me or my \nstaff if we can be of any assistance or if you have any questions. \nf \nANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER \nPRO TEMPORE \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-\nant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings will resume on questions previously postponed. \nVotes will be taken in the following \norder: \nSuspending the rules and agreeing to \nHouse Resolution 536; and \nAgreeing to the Speaker’s approval of \nthe Journal, if ordered. \nThe first electronic vote will be con-\nducted as a 15-minute vote. Any re-maining electronic vote will be con-ducted as a 5-minute vote. SUPPORTING FREEDOM OF THE \nPRESS IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The un-\nfinished business is the vote on the mo-tion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 536) supporting freedom of the press in Latin America and the Caribbean and condemning vio-lations of press freedom and violence against journalists, bloggers, and indi-viduals exercising their right to free-dom of speech, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. \nThe Clerk read the title of the resolu-\ntion. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The \nquestion is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. R\nOYCE ) that the House suspend the \nrules and agree to the resolution, as amended. \nThe vote was taken by electronic de-\nvice, and there were—yeas 399, nays 2, not voting 32, as follows: \n[Roll No. 694] \nYEAS—399 \nAbraham \nAdams Aderholt Aguilar Allen Amash Amodei Ashford Babin Barletta Barr Barton Bass Beatty Becerra Benishek Bera Beyer Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (MI) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Blum Blumenauer Bonamici Bost Boustany Boyle, Brendan \nF. \nBrady (PA) Brady (TX) Brat Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Brown (FL) Buchanan Buck Bucshon Burgess Bustos Butterfield Byrne Calvert Capps Capuano Ca´rdenas \nCarney Carson (IN) Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Cartwright Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chabot Chaffetz Chu, Judy Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clawson (FL) Clay Cleaver \nClyburn Coffman Cohen Cole Collins (GA) Collins (NY) Comstock Conaway Connolly Conyers Cook Cooper Costa Costello (PA) Courtney Cramer Crawford Crenshaw Crowley Culberson Cummings Curbelo (FL) Davis (CA) Davis, Danny Davis, Rodney DeFazio Delaney DeLauro DelBene Denham Dent DeSaulnier DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Dold Donovan Doyle, Michael \nF. \nDuckworth Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Ellmers (NC) Emmer (MN) Engel Eshoo Esty Farenthold Farr Fattah Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frankel (FL) \nFranks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gabbard Gallego Garamendi Garrett Gibbs Gibson Gohmert Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Graham Graves (GA) Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffith Grothman Guinta Guthrie Gutie´rrez \nHahn Hanna Hardy Harper Harris Hartzler Hastings Heck (WA) Hensarling Hice, Jody B. Higgins Hill Himes Hinojosa Holding Honda Hoyer Hudson Huelskamp Huffman Huizenga (MI) Hultgren Hunter Hurd (TX) Hurt (VA) Israel Jackson Lee Jeffries Jenkins (KS) Jenkins (WV) Johnson (GA) Johnson (OH) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jolly Jordan Joyce Kaptur \nKatko Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kilmer Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kinzinger (IL) Kirkpatrick Kline Knight Kuster LaHood LaMalfa Lance Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latta Lawrence Lee Levin Lewis Lieu, Ted LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren Long Loudermilk Love Lowenthal Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lujan Grisham \n(NM) \nLuja´n, Ben Ray \n(NM) \nLynch MacArthur Maloney, \nCarolyn \nMaloney, Sean Marino Matsui McCarthy McCaul McClintock McCollum McDermott McGovern McHenry McKinley McMorris \nRodgers \nMcNerney McSally Meadows Meehan Meeks Meng Messer Mica Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Moolenaar Mooney (WV) Moulton Mullin Murphy (FL) Murphy (PA) \nNadler Neal Neugebauer Newhouse Nolan Norcross Nugent Nunes O’Rourke Palazzo Pallone Palmer Pascrell Paulsen Payne Pearce Pelosi Perlmutter Perry Peters Peterson Pingree Pittenger Pitts Pocan Poe (TX) Poliquin Polis Pompeo Posey Price (NC) Price, Tom Quigley Rangel Reed Reichert Renacci Ribble Rice (NY) Rice (SC) Richmond Rigell Roby Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rokita Rooney (FL) Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothfus Rouzer Roybal-Allard Royce Ruiz Ruppersberger Russell Ryan (OH) Salmon Sa´nchez, Linda \nT. \nSanchez, Loretta Sanford Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schiff Schrader Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Scott, David \nSensenbrenner Serrano Sessions Sewell (AL) Sherman Shimkus Shuster Sinema Sires Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Speier Stefanik Stewart Stutzman Swalwell (CA) Takai Takano Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tipton Titus Tonko Torres Trott Tsongas Turner Upton Van Hollen Vargas Veasey Vela Vela´zquez \nVisclosky Wagner Walberg Walden Walker Walorski Walters, Mimi Walz Wasserman \nSchultz \nWaters, Maxine Watson Coleman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westerman Westmoreland Whitfield Williams Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Woodall Yarmuth Yoder Yoho Young (AK) Young (IA) Young (IN) Zeldin Zinke \nNAYS—2 \nJones Massie \nNOT VOTING—32 \nBridenstine \nBrownley (CA) Cuellar DeGette DeSantis Deutch Duffy Granger Grijalva Heck (NV) Herrera Beutler Issa \nKennedy Kildee Labrador Lamborn Lipinski Lummis Marchant Moore Mulvaney Napolitano Noem \nOlson Ratcliffe Rohrabacher Rush Simpson Slaughter Stivers Thompson (CA) Valadao \nb1902 \nMs. ADAMS and Mr. JOHNSON of \nGeorgia changed their vote from ‘‘nay’’ to ‘‘yea.’’ \nSo (two-thirds being in the affirma-\ntive) the rules were suspended and the resolution, as amended, was agreed to. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.021 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9322 December 15, 2015 \nThe result of the vote was announced \nas above recorded. \nA motion to reconsider was laid on \nthe table. \nStated for: Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, \nDecember 15th, I am not recorded on any votes because I was absent due to family rea-sons. If I had been present, I would have voted: ‘‘Yea’’, on rollcall 694, passage of H. Res. 536—Supporting freedom of the press in Latin America and the Caribbean and con-demning violations of press freedom and vio-lence against journalists, bloggers, and individ-uals exercising their right to freedom of speech. \nMrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, on Tues-\nday, December 15th, 2015, I was absent dur-ing rollcall vote No. 694. Had I been present, I would have voted ‘‘yea’’ on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H. Res. 536— Supporting freedom of the press in Latin America and the Caribbean and condemning violations of press freedom and violence against journalists, bloggers, and individuals exercising their right to freedom of speech. \nf \nTHE JOURNAL \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. \nGROTHMAN ). The unfinished business is \nthe question on agreeing to the Speak-er’s approval of the Journal, which the Chair will put de novo. \nThe question is on the Speaker’s ap-\nproval of the Journal. \nPursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Jour-\nnal stands approved. \nf \nAPPOINTING THE DAY FOR THE \nCONVENING OF THE SECOND SESSION OF THE ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS \nMr. M\nCCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I send \nto the desk a joint resolution (H.J. Res. 76) appointing the day for the con-vening of the second session of the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration. \nThe Clerk read the title of the joint \nresolution. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there \nobjection to the request of the gen-tleman from California? \nThere was no objection. The text of the joint resolution is as \nfollows: \nH.J. R ES. 76 \nResolved by the Senate and House of Rep-\nresentatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the second regular \nsession of the One Hundred Fourteenth Con-gress shall begin at noon on Monday, Janu-ary 4, 2016. \nThe joint resolution was ordered to \nbe engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table. \nf \nPROVIDING FOR A JOINT SESSION \nOF CONGRESS TO RECEIVE A MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT \nMr. M\nCCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I send \nto the desk a privileged concurrent res-olution and ask for its immediate con-\nsideration in the House. \nThe Clerk read the concurrent reso-\nlution, as follows: \nH. C ON. RES. 102 \nResolved by the House of Representatives (the \nSenate concurring) , That the two Houses of \nCongress assemble in the Hall of the House of Representatives on Tuesday, January 12, 2016, at 9 p.m., for the purpose of receiving such communication as the President of the United States shall be pleased to make to them. \nThe concurrent resolution was agreed \nto. \nA motion to reconsider was laid on \nthe table. \nf \nHOUR OF MEETING ON TOMORROW \nMr. M CCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask \nunanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9 a.m. tomorrow. \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there \nobjection to the request of the gen-tleman from California? \nThere was no objection. \nf \nUNESCO \n(Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN asked and was \ngiven permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) \nMs. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, \nthe Obama administration is making a push to get Congress to give the Presi-dent the authority to waive a legal pro-hibition on U.S. contributions to UNESCO. If the U.S. waives this prohi-bition and resumes payments to UNESCO, it will erode our credibility, and it will give the Palestinians and the U.N. the green light to continue the scheme to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state without direct nego-tiations with the democratic Jewish State of Israel. \nIf you add what our yearly contribu-\ntion would be plus arrears, the Amer-ican taxpayers, our constituents, could be on the hook for over half a billion dollars in just a couple of years. \nMr. Speaker, we know that our law \nhas worked to prevent the Palestinians from joining other specialized agencies at the U.N., but if Congress relents on this issue, the Palestinians will say: Let’s continue to bypass Israel and go to the U.N. for recognition. \nI will continue to vehemently oppose \nthis waiver, Mr. Speaker, and I ask my colleagues to stand with me. \nf \nGUN VIOLENCE \n(Mr. TAKANO asked and was given \npermission to address the House for 1 minute.) \nMr. TAKANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to honor the memory of two members of my community who lost their lives in the attack on San Bernardino. \nSierra Clayborn was a bright and \nkind young woman. She was a graduate of the University of California, River-side, with a degree in biochemistry. Si-\nerra’s friends described her as always smiling and always offering an encour-aging word. She loved to make people laugh. \nDamian Meins will be remembered as \na selfless, gentle, and intelligent man. He enjoyed traveling, painting, and serving others, which included dressing up as Santa Claus for school pictures. He leaves behind his high school sweet-heart and their two daughters. \nMr. Speaker, yesterday we remem-\nbered the massacre at Sandy Hook Ele-mentary School; today we honor the victims at San Bernardino. My ques-tion to this body is: Will we do any-thing to protect our communities from gun violence tomorrow? \nf \nREMEMBERING RUDY ESCOBAR, \nCOMMANDER OF THE MACON COUNTY HONOR GUARD \n(Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois \nasked and was given permission to ad-dress the House for 1 minute and to re-vise and extend his remarks.) \nMr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. \nSpeaker, I rise today to remember Rudy Escobar, an honored friend and veteran, who passed away on December 8 of this year at the age of 88. \nFor over two decades, Mr. Escobar \nserved as the commander of the Macon County Honor Guard in the service of central Illinois veterans. His dedica-tion to his brothers and sisters in uni-form was truly remarkable, and he will be missed by many in the Macon Coun-ty community. \nMr. Speaker, for most of his life, Mr. \nEscobar worked tirelessly on behalf of his fellow veterans. After his service in World War II as a China Marine, he re-turned home and cofounded the Macon County Honor Guard, which has since performed over 3,000 honor ceremonies at military funerals. \nActive in his community, it became \ncustomary for him to voluntarily transport fellow veterans to and from the VA medical center in Danville, Illi-nois. He was also a member of the American Legion and the VFW posts. \nMr. Speaker, Mr. Escobar was a lov-\ning husband, father, and grandfather; and most of all, he was a devoted vet-eran. His commitment to the military community will always be remem-bered. \nf \nVICTIMS OF GUN VIOLENCE \n(Mr. PETERS asked and was given \npermission to address the House for 1 minute.) \nMr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, Mohawk \nValley, New York, March 13, 2013: Mi-chael Ransear, 57 years old; Michael Renshaw, 51. \nSanta Barbara, California, May 23, \n2014: Katherine Cooper, 22 years old; Christopher Michaels-Martinez, 20; Cheng Yuan Hong, 20; Weihan Wang, 20; Veronika Weiss, 19; George Chen, 19 years old. \nRoseburg, Oregon, October 1, 2015: \nLawrence Levine, 67 years old; Kim \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.025 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9323 December 15, 2015 \nSaltmarsh Dietz, 59; Sarena Dawn \nMoore, 44; Jason Johnson, 33; Treven Taylor Anspach, 20 years old; Lucero Alcaraz, 19; Lucas Eibel, 18 years old; Quinn Cooper, 18 years old; Rebecka Carnes, 18. \nAlbuquerque, New Mexico, January \n19, 2013: Greg Griego, 51 years old; Sarah Griego, 40; Zephania Griego, 9. \nf \nEPA VIOLATES LAW WITH WOTUS \nPROMOTION \n(Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania \nasked and was given permission to ad-dress the House for 1 minute and to re-vise and extend his remarks.) \nMr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. \nMr. Speaker, this week the Govern-ment Accountability Office, or GAO, found that the Environmental Protec-tion Agency broke Federal laws by pro-moting its highly controversial waters of the United States rule. \nWhile I agree that the Clean Water \nAct needs clarifying, this rule would drastically expand Federal jurisdiction beyond the historical limits of the law and would apply to State and ephem-eral waters. The rule would greatly in-crease the costs of permitting and trig-ger new environmental reviews and litigation. \nThankfully, this disastrous rule was \nput on hold nationwide by a Federal Court ruling earlier this year. In its finding, the GAO said that this was an attempt by the EPA to spread ‘‘covert propaganda’’ by directing Internet users to the Web sites of environmental groups in support of the WOTUS rule. \nThis illegal attempt to gain congres-\nsional support for the rule—and to sway public opinion—undermines the integrity of the rulemaking process, and it shows just how unprecedented this vast expansion of the EPA’s power really is. \nf \nSAN BERNARDINO SHOOTING \nVICTIMS \n(Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of Cali-\nfornia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) \nMs. LORETTA SANCHEZ of Cali-\nfornia. Mr. Speaker, I stand here today to remember the victims of the tragic terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California. \nAmong these victims was a young \nwoman from my district named Tin Nguyen. She was from Santa Ana, Cali-fornia. Tin was only 31 years old, and she had been working for the San Bernardino County Department of Pub-lic Health for 4 years as a food inspec-tor, and she was planning her wedding to her longtime boyfriend when she was taken on that day of the shooting. \nAt the age of 8, Tin and her family \nfled Vietnam. They fled a war, famine, and all sorts of terrible situations to come and find a new life in California. Despite the challenges of being an im-migrant, Tin graduated from Valley High School in Santa Ana, and she re-ceived her undergraduate degree from \nCal State, Fullerton. \nLast Saturday, family and friends \ngathered at Saint Barbara’s Catholic Church in Santa Ana to mourn the death of this young woman who was known for her incredible spirit and a heart bigger than the sun. Let us honor the memory of this extraordinary young woman. She gave so much, but her life was tragically cut short by these shootings. \nf \nb1915 \nTHE STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM IS \nNEVER OVER \n(Mr. L AMALFA asked and was given \npermission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his re-marks.) \nMr. L\nAMALFA. Mr. Speaker, 224 \nyears ago today the States ratified the first 10 amendments to our Constitu-tion. \nThese most basic rights remain the \nbedrock of our society; yet, even today we have seen them come under attack: \nFreedom of speech has been attacked \nby some who prefer not to hear dis-senting opinions, forgetting that it ap-plies to all. \nThe right to bear arms is under con-\nstant threat from those who would pre-fer that only criminals are armed and that law-abiding Americans are de-fenseless. \nFreedom from unreasonable search \nand seizure has come under attack from our own government, which be-lieves we must sacrifice liberty for se-curity. \nFreedom of religion, the very right \nour Founders sought when they fled their homes overseas, is threatened by those who would coerce Americans to violate their faith in their day-to-day lives. \nIn every instance, the House of Rep-\nresentatives has fought to preserve these rights, but this serves to remind us that the struggle for freedom is never over, that we must always re-main vigilant, and that freedom is but one generation from extinction. \nBut today we mark this anniversary \nin celebration of the vision the Found-ers had. God bless them, and God bless America for having done so. \nf \nRECOGNIZING FIRST RESPONDERS \nAFTER THE MASS SHOOTING IN SAN BERNARDINO \n(Mr. RUIZ asked and was given per-\nmission to address the House for 1 minute.) \nMr. RUIZ. Mr. Speaker, I am heart-\nbroken and outraged over the mass shooting act of terror that took the lives of innocent people and left many others wounded in the neighboring community of San Bernardino. \nThese cold-blooded acts of violence in \nour Nation has to stop. I strongly de-nounce this act of terror and mourn for the 14 victims of this horrific tragedy, including Aurora Godoy, a constituent \nof mine from San Jacinto, California, whose young life was cut far too short. \nDecember 2, 2015, will remain in all of \nour memories as a tragic day for San Bernardino, the Inland Empire, Cali-fornia, and our Nation. In the face of this tragedy, however, true heroism shined through when law enforcement officials ran towards the danger, risk-ing their own lives to protect the lives of others and when first responders tended to the injuries of the victims. \nOur Nation should be proud of the \nmen and women who risked their lives to save our community that day. Thank you to the men and women who wore the badge and took care of the victims. \nf \nTRADE DEFICIT \n(Ms. KAPTUR asked and was given \npermission to address the House for 1 minute.) \nMs. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to \ncall on my colleagues and the Amer-ican people to oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the TPP. \nThis job-outsourcing trade deal, like \nevery one before it, has been sold to the American people with the false promise of jobs in exports. By looking at America’s accounts, you can tell they are all in the red if you take a look at the gaping trade deficits out there and job deficits and the lives of people, how they have been impacted by every single trade deal that has been signed. \nOnce again, our global trade deficit \ngrew by more than $40 billion just in \nOctober, and it had grown by $1 billion more than the increase from Sep-tember. Experts estimate that $1 bil-lion invested in this country creates 5,000 additional jobs. \nFor every $1 billion of trade deficit \nwe have, we lose 5,000 jobs here. When your trade deficit is half a trillion dol-lars, it is no wonder we have a job def-icit across this country. \nSince China joined the WTO, the U.S. \ngoods trade deficit with China has reached $324.4 billion, hundreds of thousands of jobs gone. The same with NAFTA, $9 trillion in deficit. \nMr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to \nreject the TPP. \nf \nKIRK DOUGLAS’ BIRTHDAY \n(Mr. COHEN asked and was given per-\nmission to address the House for 1 minute.) \nMr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, today I \nrise to honor the 99th birthday of a great American: Kirk Douglas. \nI read about Mr. Douglas’ birthday in \nthe paper where he didn’t receive gifts, but gave gifts. He gave a $15 million contribution to an Alzheimer’s home in California. He did this on his birthday. \nI found out that he has a long history \nof charitable giving in philanthropy. In Los Angeles, he created 400 different playgrounds, has given money to chil-dren’s hospitals, and taken a long ef-fort to help people from all walks of life. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.029 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9324 December 15, 2015 \nI saw him also in a movie that I saw \nrecently called ‘‘Trumbo.’’ I didn’t re-alize that he had stood up against blacklisting in Hollywood and had en-couraged the hiring of Dalton Trumbo, a blacklisted writer, who saved his ca-reer from what was a scourge on the United States Congress and our history of free speech and democracy. \nI first learned all of what Kirk Doug-\nlas has done when I heard an apology for slavery and Jim Crow, and I found out he had been for an apology for slav-ery for years. He had an Internet site encouraging people to join a petition and lobbyists to pass an apology for slavery in this country. \nThese type of things show that Kirk \nDouglas is the type of person we should emulate and honor. He has had 99 great years. I thank him for his efforts of charitable giving and for his philos-ophy of forgiveness and understanding. \nf \nCOCONSPIRATORS IN SUPPORTING \nTERRORISM \nThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Under \nthe Speaker’s announced policy of Jan-uary 6, 2015, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. G\nOHMERT ) \nfor 30 minutes. \nMr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, as we \nconsider this week what Congress will fund through September 30 of next year and what we will not fund, the San Bernardino shooting, the radical Islamist terrorist attack there, has awakened a lot of people across the country. \nThere is an article from December 2, \n2015, by Ashley Pratte. The question is: Is ISIS contained or covered up? That is the title. \n‘‘With the recent terrorist attacks in \nParis carried out by ISIS, Americans are on high alert—and rightfully so. Just hours prior to the attacks Obama said that ISIS was ‘contained.’ Ameri-cans everywhere are baffled by Obama’s continued ignorance and lack of strategy when it comes to destroy-ing the Islamic State. \n‘‘Yesterday, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, \nformer head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, stated on The Lead with Jake Tapper that the White House know-ingly ignored a 2012 report about the rise of ISIS because they didn’t mesh well with the re-election ‘narrative.’ \n‘‘Now it is all starting to make sense. \nOf course the President believes ISIS is contained, he has been willingly and knowingly ignoring reports about the serious threats that ISIS poses to America and to the world since it wouldn’t help him get re-elected. \n‘‘The scary thing is that these aren’t \nthe first reports we have heard from former Obama intelligence officials re-garding the White House ignoring their reports on ISIS. This September The Daily Beast published an exclusive story by Shane Harris and Nancy A. Youssef, claiming that over 50 spies say ISIS intelligence was cooked. These 50 intelligence analysts formally filed a complaint that their reports on ISIS were being ‘inappropriately’ altered by \nsenior officials. \n‘‘These are very powerful words. If \nthere truly is a ‘cancer’ at the highest level of command, Americans have a lot to be concerned about when it comes to national defense and security. According to the Daily Beast, the accu-sations being made suggest that a sig-nificant amount of people tracking the inner workings of ISIS think that their reports are being altered to fit a public narrative—echoing the sentiments of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. \n‘‘It is disturbing to think that our \nmilitary and intelligence officials aren’t being listened to by the Obama administration simply because it doesn’t fit their narrative. Just yester-day lawmakers on Capitol Hill heard from the chairman of the Pentagon’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Jo-seph Dunford, that ISIS is not con-tained, contradicting President Obama’s statements. We now have to question whether or not intelligence reports are still being ignored because of their inconvenience to the adminis-tration and because of the looming election year. \n‘‘Sadly, these reports from top mili-\ntary and intelligence officials aren’t surprising. Americans have noticed for a while that Obama’s statements on ISIS show how little he knows about the threat they pose or that he is delib-erately ignoring the facts. A new CBS poll indicates that only 23% of Ameri-cans think Obama has a clear strategy for defeating ISIS, which shows just how little confidence Americans have in their commander-in-chief. \n‘‘On Monday, just weeks after the \nParis attacks, Obama made mind-bog-gling remarks at a climate change summit in Paris, where he made it a point to mention that he will beat ISIS by fighting climate change. \n‘‘Let’s be honest, ISIS was never a \n‘jayvee’ team, it was never ‘contained,’ and it certainly won’t be defeated by resolving to end climate change, but it was a good narrative for the Obama ad-ministration spin to quell the fear of the American public. However, this narrative stands in stark contrast with the real narrative, the one being told by military and senior intelligence of-ficials—the one being ignored.’’ \nAnd we have from the Center for Im-\nmigration Studies, Mr. Speaker, an ‘‘Analysis of the ‘Visa Waiver Program Improvement Act of 2015,’’’ this out December 14, 2015. \nIt reviews the House bill drafted to \ntighten up the Visa Waiver Program, and it has been reported that this may be included in the omnibus—we will find out tonight—2016 spending bill as a kind of political replacement for the bill passed in November to tighten up the refugee screening. \nThis article goes on from the Center \nfor Immigration Studies that: \n‘‘One key provision makes it out-of- \nbounds for people who have visited—or who are natives of—Syria or Iraq, or state sponsors of terror to use the VWP. Another major provision \ntightens up requirements and certifi-cations by countries to live by the con-ditions of the participation—including use of fraud-resistant passports and strict timeframes for reporting of lost or stolen documents. \n‘‘Dan Cadman, a Center fellow and \nauthor of the analysis, said, ‘Congress has at least decided to tackle many of the gaps and problems with the VWP, which has represented for some time the ‘soft underbelly of homeland secu-rity’; but there can be no doubt that the U.S. vetting for refugees and asy-lum seekers still represents a major national security risk, and remains an unaddressed problem.’ \n‘‘One major problem with the bill is \nthe exception to several requirements that has been carved out for countries in the Schengen visa-free zone, which covers nearly all of northern, western, and central Europe, including hotbeds of terrorist activities in France and Belgium. Cadman writes that ‘this ex-ception is the caveat that undoes the intent of the rule.’’’ \nSo, Mr. Speaker, it is important to \nnote that we have got a lot more work to do here to prevent this President’s administration from continuing to allow people into this country without our ability to actually vet them and check them. \nThere are indications that members \nof the Visa Waiver Program may only check one in three documents that are provided to them because they just don’t have time. \nWell, just when Americans thought \nwe were unsafe, unsecure, that this ad-ministration won’t face up to the threat that radical Islam is, that most all of the country understands we are up against except the administration— they won’t mention the words radical Islam—and just when people think they are starting to maybe make the point and get the point across to this administration, we have the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Secu-rity who stands up for the terrorists. \nb1930 \nHe stands up for people who want to \ncome into this country and do us harm. \nThis is an article from Politico, of all \nplaces, and the title reads: ‘‘DHS chief: ‘Legal limits’ on scrutinizing immi-grants’ Web postings.’’ \nThe article reads: ‘‘‘We are dealing with private com-\nmunications and things for which there is an expectation of privacy,’ Jeh John-son says in an interview.’’ \nMr. Speaker, that is very interesting. \nI am glad that the Secretary of Home-land Security understands that the Su-preme Court says there is a right to privacy somewhere within the shadow of the penumbra of the Constitution— that is, the Bill of Rights. Yet he doesn’t understand those constitu-tional protections are not afforded to people who want to come into the United States. They are in another country. I can’t imagine this in any-body’s definition of our U.S. Constitu-tion. No Americans in other countries \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:43 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.031 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9325 December 15, 2015 \nare entitled to U.S. constitutional pro-\ntections over there, and they are peo-ple who are applying to come in. \nThere is social media out there, and \nthere are really sharp folks in Home-land Security and in the Justice De-partment who are not under the direct thumb of the administration who know how to access it; they know how to check things; they can use search en-gines and can check to see what con-tacts and what pictures are out there. Are they pictured with a terrorist somewhere? Of course, that might get our friend Senator M\nCCAINin trouble; \nbut, nonetheless, there is a lot of social media that can be checked. \nHere we have an article today, De-\ncember 15, by Seung Min Kim: \n‘‘Homeland Security Secretary Jeh \nJohnson said Tuesday there are ‘cer-tain legal limits’ that constrain federal officials from scrutinizing the social media histories of foreigners trying to enter the United States—a new debate that has flared in the aftermath of the San Bernardino, California terrorist at-tack. \n‘‘His comments, in an interview with \nPOLITICO, mark the first time the Homeland Security chief weighed in on the merits of reviewing social media in immigration cases. According to recent news reports, Tashfeen Malik, the fe-male shooter in the California mas-sacre, had posted extremist views yet still obtained a visa to the United States. \n‘‘‘You have to keep in mind—and \nthis is again, not a comment on any particular case—that social media, Facebook, and the like can involve public statements, public postings, it can involve friending, and it can in-volve private communications,’ John-son said from his office at the Depart-ment of Homeland Security head-quarters in northwest Washington. \n‘‘‘We are dealing with private com-\nmunications and things for which there is an expectation of privacy, and you’re dealing with U.S. persons,’ Johnson continued. ‘There are certain legal lim-its to what we can do.’’’ \nMr. Speaker, I would suggest to you \nthat people who are trying to come into this country are not U.S. persons and that social media ought to be used by Homeland Security to find out what kind of lengths people will take who want to come into this country. \nIf they had not marginalized one of \nthe best people working for Homeland Security and had not gone after him and attacked him, they would have learned—and I am talking about my friend Phil Haney, who was very adept at using social media to see if they had questions about somebody—what kind of contacts are out there on the Inter-net? What pictures were made with whom? What is posted where about this person? It is also important to have somebody like him who has spent time in the Middle East, who knows the lan-guage, who knows and understands moderate Islam, who understands rad-ical Islam, who understands who the players are and who the imams are who \nare teaching radical Islam, who knows the groups that are teaching radical Islam. \nIf Phil Haney had been allowed to \ncontinue the investigation into Tablighi Jamaat, then he would have seen the ties that these shooters had. He would have found Ms. Malik’s social posting. One of the things he says \nwould have tipped him off right away is that ‘‘Tashfeen Malik’’ is a boy’s name, and he is a bit of a hero in radical Is-lamic circles. If you know that, which I didn’t and he does, then you pull that person aside for additional screening. You pull that application and ask, ‘‘Why do you have a boy’s name? You certainly weren’t given that.’’ His ex-ample is it would be like a woman from America who was trying to get into an-other country with the name ‘‘George Washington.’’ Really? That is your real name? It would raise flags and ques-tions and would cause you to do further checking. \nPeople at Homeland Security have \nseen, if you become a whistleblower and if you blow the whistle on the Obama administration’s and Homeland Security’s deleting of documents and on their refusing to investigate radical Islam, then they will convene a grand jury to make your life a living hell until you retire, and that is only if they can’t find some little ‘‘some-thing’’ to indict you of after they have looked everywhere and through every-thing. \nThe people at Homeland Security \nhave seen what happens to people who are honest, who are honorable, who are trying to warn of contacts this admin-istration has with people who have ties to radical Islam. I know there are peo-ple out there who say, ‘‘I wish you would use names.’’ Why doesn’t some-body in the mainstream media go get the pleadings from the Holy Land Foundation trial in the Federal court of the Northern District of Texas, and you will see a list of names. If there were somebody who were worthy of a Pulitzer anymore, he would take those names and compare them against the people who have access to the White House and the groups that have access to the White House and to the State Department and to the Justice Depart-ment and to intelligence agencies. \nThey would find that CAIR, just \nblocks away from here—I can see their building from my window, and they can see mine—is on the list. Yet, it is CAIR that has—I don’t know if they have got a red phone or what they have got over to the White House; but when they get bothered or when, maybe, they don’t like a Koranic scripture or something that is being quoted in training mate-rial, they can just call the White House and tell them to get rid of it, and they do. They can call the Justice Depart-ment, for, after all, CAIR and the FBI were outreach partners. Finally, in 2009, after they were implicated as partners, coconspirators in funding ter-rorism, the FBI finally, in 2009, had to send them a letter, saying, basically, \nWe had better suspend our relationship as partners, because there was all this evidence at the Holy Land Foundation trial that, actually, you are a sup-porter, and you are a coconspirator; so we are going to have to put that on hold for a bit. But this administration picked right back up. CAIR was cer-tainly heard from out in California im-mediately after the shootings. \nAnyway, this article goes on. It \nreads: \n‘‘Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have \nseized on reports that Malik passed a trio of background checks during her fiancee visa application process in 2014 despite publishing social media posts that were openly supportive of violent jihadism.’’ \nAnyway, congratulations to the Sec-\nretary of Homeland Security. Ameri-cans can sleep well because Secretary Johnson is setting us up to have an-other Tashfeen Malik shoot more peo-ple because we are not going to, under this administration, check their social media to see if they have pledged alle-giance to ISIS. \nThis is from Todd Bensman, Decem-\nber 10, PJ Media: ‘‘America is Talking About the Wrong Refugee Problem.’’ \nI would submit it is a legitimate \nproblem we have been talking about, but this article points out a problem that, certainly, I and many of my Re-publican friends have been pointing to. \nThe article reads: ‘‘A few weeks ago, the fangs came \nout when news broke that the Paris attackers were ‘refugees’ who had en-tered the European continent among thousands of immigrants. Elected Re-publicans and conservative pundits challenged the American plan to reset-tle Syrian refugees, and still are. \n‘‘But their bite is off mark. ‘‘As many as six of the Paris \nattackers and their leader were not re-settled refugees of the sort President Obama wants to import into the coun-try (three attackers still have not been publicly identified). \n‘‘These terrorists entered Europe \nwith illegal immigrant asylum seekers, of the sort who routinely show up at the U.S.-Mexico border.’’ \nMr. Speaker, I am still hearing from \nfriends on the U.S.-Mexico border who know and who say we are continuing to have people from countries where rad-ical Islam is a major problem—in the Middle East and in North Africa—show up at the U.S.-Mexico border. Some of them are caught. \nThe article points out: \n‘‘Illegal immigrant asylum seekers \ndon’t give the host nation a choice. They show up uninvited, smuggled, and often unknowable. They insist on being taken in anyway, pointing to our gen-erous laws and traditions. \n‘‘At least three of the Paris terror-\nists—including main attack planner Abdelhamid Abaaoud—were what we would call Special Interest Aliens (SIAs). They infiltrated over the com-mon European external . . . border at \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:43 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.033 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9326 December 15, 2015 \nGreece, just like Syrians show up at \nthe U.S.-Mexico border, camouflaged among many other illegal immigrants. Europe’s SIAs from Syria, Somalia, Pakistan, and many other Islamic na-tions are moved along their land and sea routes with the ubiquitous aid of human smugglers, just as they are to the U.S.-Mexico border. \n‘‘This is perhaps the world’s deadliest \nknown case of terrorist border infiltra-tion by SIAs. Abaaoud was a Belgium citizen before he went to Syria and be-came a notorious Islamic State opera-tive. He knew he was on the radar of intelligence services, and couldn’t come home the legal way unnoticed. So he traveled home as an illegal migrant under the cover of thousands of legiti-mate ones.’’ \nMr. Speaker, I know I have got peo-\nple out there who have belittled me in the past when I have quoted from the FBI Director that we have people from radical Islamic areas who have camou-flaged themselves. He had said that some of them actually changed their names to have Hispanic-sounding names and that they tried to blend in. That is what the FBI Director says. People can belittle me all day long, but when the FBI Director—in this case, the former FBI Director—said that while he was Director, then, when those points are made, somebody needs to talk about them whether the coun-try is going to make fun of one or not. \nb1945 \nIn an article, dated December 10, \n2015, by Andrew McCarthy, titled, ‘‘After Jihadist Mass Murder, the CAIR’s Sharia Agenda Rolls On,’’ he points out just how CAIR continues with their agenda and what those who have studied CAIR, its contacts, its re-lations, what they intend is civiliza-tion jihad. That is our civilization they care to take over. \nNow, my friend from the Department \nof Homeland Security, now retired so he can talk about things that aren’t classified, discussed some of these things on Megan Kelly’s show. He was actually investigating Tablighi Jamaat, which is one of many organi-zations that are under the overall rad-ical Islamic movement. As he has pointed out, Tablighi Jamaat means ‘‘society for spreading faith.’’ It is an Islamic global proselytizing movement with followers in over 200 countries. \nNow, not everybody in Tablighi \nJamaat is a terrorist. Not everybody in Tablighi Jamaat is a radical Islamist, but it should set off bells and whistles to wake people up when a relationship is seen. \nFrom the Middle East Quarterly in \n2005, it states: ‘‘After joining Tablighi Jamaat, groups at a local mosque or Is-lamic center and doing a few local dawa (proselytism) missions, Tablighi officials invite star recruits to the Tablighi center in Raiwind, Pakistan, for four months of additional mis-sionary training. Representatives of terrorist organizations approach the students at the Raiwind center and in-\nvite them to undertake military train-ing.’’ \nTablighi Jamaat links to terror in-\nclude: 1995, Benazir Bhutto coup at-tempt; 2001, John Walker Lindh; 2001, Richard Reid, the shoe bomber; 2002, Jose Padilla; 2002, Portland Seven; 2002, Lackawanna Six; 2005, London Under-ground Bombing; 2006, airline bombing plot; 2008, Barcelona plot. \nThose are just some of the ties that \nTablighi Jamaat has had with ter-rorism. \nNow, the al-Huda Institute is a global \nnetwork of Islamist religious schools, with branches in Pakistan, Canada, and the United States. USA Today re-ported on December 12, 2015: ‘‘Nosheen Ali Irfan, 54, who lives in Karachi, Pakistan’s largest city, said she sent both of her daughters to study in Al- Huda during summer 2014 but within five weeks became disgruntled by the teachings and discontinued the lessons. \n‘‘Irfan said her family has a religious \nbackground but the teachings at Al- Huda were ‘too radical’ even for them . . . ‘If there is an environment Jihadis (Islamic warriors) would come to re-cruit, it would be these kinds of insti-tutions,’ she said.’’ \nAl-Huda links to terror include Ali \nAsad Chandia, an al-Huda teacher in College Park, Maryland, who provided material support to a Pakistani terror group; 2012, four former students join ISIS in Syria; and in 2015, Tashfeen Malik, who was engaged in the San Bernardino attack. \nIn San Bernardino, the investigation \ninto groups affiliated with the Deobandi Islamic movement was stopped before it could have connected the dots, and that is where Phil Haney was going in. He was finding all these ties that Tablighi Jamaat individuals had with other known terrorists. In fact, he got a letter of commendation before Homeland Security realized, wow, he is finding people that have ties to this administration so we have got to stop him cold. \nBefore they realized that, June 8, \n2012, he was given a letter that said: ‘‘On behalf of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), I commend your out-standing contributions while assigned to the National Training Center-Pas-senger (NTC–P). Your display of dedica-tion and effort in the fight against ter-rorism has been exemplary. \n‘‘Your talents and professionalism \nhave contributed to the continued achievements of the NTC–P. You played a key role by providing support to the CBP mission and the NTC–P lead role in defending and protecting our nation’s borders.’’ \nOn further down, it says: ‘‘Addition-\nally, your expertise and experience has been invaluable while assigned to the Advanced Targeting Team (ATT). Your research on the Tablighi Jamaat Ini-tiative has assisted in the identifica-tion of over 300 persons with possible connections to terrorism. The assist-ance you have provided in the develop-ment of this initiative has been key to \nthe future success of the project.’’ \nSee, that was before they pulled him \noff and said no more looking into Tablighi Jamaat. You can’t do it be-cause you are messing with people you can’t be messing with. Apparently, ties would come back to this administra-tion. It is not hard to figure out. Just look at the Holy Land Foundation pleadings, look at who are listed as co-conspirators in supporting terrorism, and look at whom this administration takes advice from. \nTommy Nelson, a minister back in \nDenton, Texas, I have never met once, said: Yeah, God is in control, but just because he is in control doesn’t mean he wants us to lean on our shovel and pray for a hole. \nWell, when this headline came out, \nMr. Speaker, God isn’t fixing this, de-spite prayers that God would fix it. I feel sure God is saying: Use what I have given you, and you can stop it yourself. \nI yield back the balance of my time. \nf \nLEAVE OF ABSENCE \nBy unanimous consent, leave of ab-\nsence was granted to: \nMr. C UELLAR (at the request of Ms. \nPELOSI ) for today on account of family \nreasons. \nf \nSENATE BILL REFERRED \nA bill of the Senate of the following \ntitle was taken from the Speaker’s table and, under the rule, referred as follows: \nS. 2044. An act to prohibit the use of cer-\ntain clauses in form contracts that restrict the ability of a consumer to communicate regarding the goods or services offered in interstate commerce that were the subject of the contract, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. \nf \nSENATE ENROLLED BILL SIGNED \nThe Speaker announced his signature \nto an enrolled bill of the Senate of the following title: \nS. 808. An act to establish the Surface \nTransportation Board as an independent es-tablishment, and for other purposes. \nf \nBILLS PRESENTED TO THE \nPRESIDENT \nKaren L. Haas, Clerk of the House, \nreported that on December 11, 2015, she presented to the President of the United States, for his approval, the fol-lowing bills: \nH.R. 2250. Further Continuing Appropria-\ntions Act, 2016. \nH.R. 2693. To designate the arboretum at \nthe Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center in Richmond, Virginia, as the ‘‘Phyl-lis E. Galanti Arboretum’’. \nf \nADJOURNMENT \nMr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I move \nthat the House do now adjourn. \nThe motion was agreed to; accord-\ningly (at 7 o’clock and 51 minutes \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:43 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.034 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9327 December 15, 2015 \np.m.), under its previous order, the \nHouse adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, December 16, 2015, at 9 a.m. \nf \nEXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, \nETC. \nUnder clause 2 of rule XIV, executive \ncommunications were taken from the Speaker’s table and referred as follows: \n3764. A letter from the Administrator, Risk \nManagement Agency, Department of Agri-culture, transmitting the Department’s final rule — Area Risk Protection Insurance (ARPI) Regulations; ARPI Basic Provisions and ARPI Forage Crop Insurance Provisions [Docket No.: FCIC-15-0003] (RIN: 0563-AC49) received December 11, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law 104- 121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Agriculture. \n3765. A letter from the OSD Federal Reg-\nister Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting the De-partment’s Major interim final rule — Tran-sition Assistance Program (TAP) for Mili-tary Personnel [Docket ID: DOD-2013-OS- 0236] (RIN: 0790-AJ17) received December 10, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Armed Services. \n3766. A letter from the Associate General \nCounsel for Legislation and Regulations, De-partment of Housing and Urban Develop-ment, transmitting the Department’s final rule — Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing: Defining ‘‘Chronically Homeless’’ [Docket No.: FR- 5809-F-01] (RIN: 2506-AC37) received Decem-ber 11, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Financial Services. \n3767. A letter from the Assistant General \nCounsel for Legislation, Regulation and En-ergy Efficiency, Office of the General Coun-sel, Department of Energy, transmitting the Department’s final determination — Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for High-Intensity Discharge Lamps [Docket No.: EERE-2010-BT-STD-0043] (RIN: 1904-AC36) received December 10, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. \n3768. A letter from the General Counsel, \nFederal Energy Regulatory Commission, transmitting the Commission’s final rule — Transmission Operations Reliability Stand-ards and Interconnection Reliability Oper-ations and Coordination Reliability Stand-ards [Docket No.: RM15-16-000; Order No.: 817] received December 10, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law 104- 121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. \n3769. A letter from the General Counsel, \nFederal Energy Regulatory Commission, transmitting the Commission’s final rule — Revisions to Emergency Operations Reli-ability Standards; Revisions to Undervoltage Load Shedding Reliability Standards; Revi-sions to the Definition of ‘‘Remedial Action Scheme’’ and Related Reliability Standards [Docket Nos.: RM15-7-000, RM15-12-000, RM15- 13-000; Order No.: 818] received December 10, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Com-merce. \n3770. A letter from the Director, Office of \nCongressional Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, transmitting the Commission’s final rule — Ultimate Heat Sink for Nuclear Power Plants, Regulatory Guide 1.27 Revi-sion 3, received December 11, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law \n104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Com-mittee on Energy and Commerce. \n3771. A letter from the Deputy Assistant \nAdministrator for Regulatory Programs, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, transmitting the Adminis-tration’s final rule — Takes of Marine Mam-mals Incidental to Specified Activities; U.S. Navy Training and Testing Activities in the Northwest Training and Testing Study Area [Docket No.: 140109018-5999-02] (RIN: 0648- BD89) received December 10, 2015, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Added by Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Com-mittee on Natural Resources. \nf \nREPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON \nPUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS \nUnder clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of \ncommittees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows: \nMr. M CCAUL: Committee on Homeland Se-\ncurity. H.R. 3878. A bill to enhance cyberse-curity information sharing and coordination at ports in the United States, and for other purposes, with an amendment (Rept. 114–379, Pt. 1). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. \nMr. M\nCCAUL: Committee on Homeland Se-\ncurity. H.R. 2285. A bill to improve enforce-ment against trafficking in cultural property and prevent stolen or illicit cultural prop-erty from financing terrorist and criminal networks, and for other purposes, with an amendment (Rept. 114–380, Pt. 1). \nOrdered to be printed. Mr. DENT: Committee on Ethics. In the \nMatter of Allegations Relating to Represent-ative J\nARED POLIS (Rept. 114–381). Referred \nto the House Calendar. \nDISCHARGE OF COMMITTEE \nPursuant to clause 2 of rule XIII, the \nCommittee on Transportation and In-frastructure discharged from further consideration. H.R. 3878 referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. \nf \nPUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS \nUnder clause 2 of rule XII, public \nbills and resolutions of the following titles were introduced and severally re-ferred, as follows: \nBy Mr. COHEN (for himself, Mr. N AD-\nLER, Mr. R OHRABACHER , and Mr. \nFORBES ): \nH.R. 4246. A bill to exempt for an addi-\ntional 4-year period, from the application of the means-test presumption of abuse under chapter 7, qualifying members of reserve components of the Armed Forces and mem-bers of the National Guard who, after Sep-tember 11, 2001, are called to active duty or to perform a homeland defense activity for not less than 90 days; to the Committee on the Judiciary. \nBy Mr. CURBELO of Florida: \nH.R. 4247. A bill to provide that certain \nCuban entrants are ineligible to receive ref-ugee assistance, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Education and the Work-force, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subse-quently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. \nBy Mr. WESTMORELAND (for himself \nand Mr. D\nAVID SCOTT of Georgia): \nH.R. 4248. A bill to amend the Financial \nStability Act to revise the reevaluation pro-cedures with respect to determinations by \nthe Financial Stability Oversight Council that a nonbank financial company shall be supervised by the Board of Governors and shall be subject to prudential standards; to the Committee on Financial Services. \nBy Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia: \nH.R. 4249. A bill to provide an increased \nFederal capability for civil investigations and litigation, regarding alleged police, pros-ecutorial, or judicial misconduct, under sec-tion 210401 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judici-ary. \nBy Mr. BLUMENAUER: \nH.R. 4250. A bill to amend the Internal Rev-\nenue Code of 1986 to extend the statute of limitation for credit or refund for taxpayers who receive combat pay; to the Committee on Ways and Means. \nBy Mr. COFFMAN (for himself, Mr. \nC\nARTWRIGHT , Mr. P OCAN , Mr. P AS-\nCRELL , Mr. L ATTA , Mr. H ONDA , Ms. \nESTY, Mr. N UGENT , Mr. I SRAEL , Mr. \nLOEBSACK , Mr. C OLE, Mr. S EAN PAT-\nRICK MALONEY of New York, Ms. \nBROWNLEY of California, Mr. C OSTA , \nMr. R YAN of Ohio, Mrs. L OVE, Mr. \nPALAZZO , Mr. M ILLER of Florida, Mr. \nZINKE, Mr. B ILIRAKIS , Mr. J ONES , Miss \nRICEof New York, Mr. W ALKER , Mr. \nBOST, Mr. K INGof Iowa, Mr. Z ELDIN , \nMr. C OSTELLO of Pennsylvania, and \nMr. R UIZ): \nH.R. 4251. A bill to amend title 10, United \nStates Code, to ensure that the Secretary of Defense affords each member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces with the op-portunity for a physical examination before the member separates from the Armed Forces; to the Committee on Armed Serv-ices. \nBy Mr. FINCHER (for himself, Mr. \nH\nECK of Washington, and Mr. S TIV-\nERS): \nH.R. 4252. A bill to extend temporarily the \nextended period of protection for members of uniformed services relating to mortgages, mortgage foreclosure, and eviction, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Vet-erans’ Affairs. \nBy Mr. HASTINGS (for himself, Ms. \nE\nDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. \nGRIJALVA , Mr. M URPHY of Florida, \nMr. J OHNSON of Georgia, and Mr. V AN \nHOLLEN ): \nH.R. 4253. A bill to establish a grant pro-\ngram to help State and local law enforce-ment agencies reduce the risk of injury and death relating to the wandering characteris-tics of some children with autism and other disabilities; to the Committee on the Judici-ary. \nBy Mr. KILMER: \nH.R. 4254. A bill to prohibit employers from \nrequiring grocery store employees to enter into covenants not to compete, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Education and the Workforce. \nBy Mr. BEN RAY LUJA ´N of New Mex-\nico: \nH.R. 4255. A bill to amend the Act com-\nmonly known as the Indian Long-Term Leas-ing Act to expand certain exceptions for long-term lease limits for the Pueblo of Santa Clara; to the Committee on Natural Resources. \nBy Mr. MURPHY of Florida: \nH.R. 4256. A bill to simplify income-based \nrepayment under the Federal student loan program, and for other purposes; to the Com-mittee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently deter-mined by the Speaker, in each case for con-sideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE7.037 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9328 December 15, 2015 \nBy Mr. NUNES (for himself, Mr. \nTHORNBERRY , Mr. M CCAUL, Mr. M IL-\nLER of Florida, Mr. F RELINGHUYSEN , \nMs. G RANGER , Mr. K INGof New York, \nMr. L OBIONDO , Mr. R OONEY of Flor-\nida, Mr. H ECKof Nevada, Mr. P OMPEO , \nMr. S TEWART , Mr. T IBERI , Mr. R OS-\nKAM, Ms. J ENKINS of Kansas, Mr. \nMARCHANT , Mrs. B LACK , Mr. M EEHAN , \nMr. D OLD, and Mr. H OLDING ): \nH.R. 4257. A bill to protect the American \nand Iranian peoples as well as the global economy from Iran’s systematic abjuration of international legal standards on human and civil rights, its support for international terrorism, and the corrosive economic mal-feasance of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, and for other purposes; to the Com-mittee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, Ways and Means, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provi-sions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. \nBy Mr. ROSKAM (for himself, Mr. \nN\nUNES , Mr. P OMPEO , and Mr. Z ELDIN ): \nH.R. 4258. A bill to impose sanctions \nagainst any entity with respect to which Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps owns, di-rectly or indirectly, a 20 percent or greater interest in the entity, and for other pur-poses; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Finan-cial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall with-in the jurisdiction of the committee con-cerned. \nBy Mr. SENSENBRENNER (for him-\nself, Mr. R\nIBBLE , and Mr. G ROTHMAN ): \nH.R. 4259. A bill to prohibit the Adminis-\ntrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from establishing, implementing, or enforcing any limit on the aggregate emis-sions of carbon dioxide from a State or any category or subcategory of sources within a State; to the Committee on Energy and Com-merce. \nBy Ms. SINEMA (for herself, Mr. C\nOS-\nTELLO of Pennsylvania, and Mr. C OFF-\nMAN): \nH.R. 4260. A bill to protect servicemembers \nin higher education, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Commit-tees on Veterans’ Affairs, and Armed Serv-ices, for a period to be subsequently deter-mined by the Speaker, in each case for con-sideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. \nBy Mr. M\nCCARTHY: \nH.J. Res. 76. A joint resolution appointing \nthe day for convening of the second session of the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress; considered and passed. considered and passed. \nBy Mr. D\nEFAZIO (for himself and Mr. \nJONES ): \nH.J. Res. 77. A joint resolution to amend \nthe War Powers Resolution; to the Com-mittee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provi-sions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. \nBy Mr. M\nCCARTHY: \nH. Con. Res. 102. Concurrent resolution \nproviding for a joint session of Congress to receive a message from the President; con-sidered and agreed to. considered and agreed to. \nBy Mr. GALLEGO (for himself, Mr. \nB\nYRNE , Mr. L EWIS, Mr. J OHNSON of \nGeorgia, Mr. F ARR, and Mr. M CGOV-\nERN): H. Res. 565. A resolution supporting the \npeace process in Colombia; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. \nf \nMEMORIALS \nUnder clause 3 of rule XII, \n163. The SPEAKER presented a memorial \nof the General Assembly of the State of New Jersey, relative to Senate Concurrent Reso-lution No. 132, requesting the Congress of the United States call a convention of the States to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. \nf \nPRIVATE BILLS AND \nRESOLUTIONS \nUnder clause 3 of rule XII, \nMr. LOEBSACK introduced a bill (H.R. \n4261) for the relief of Max Villatoros; which was referred to the Committee on the Judici-ary. \nf \nCONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY \nSTATEMENT \nPursuant to clause 7 of rule XII of \nthe Rules of the House of Representa-tives, the following statements are sub-mitted regarding the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitu-tion to enact the accompanying bill or joint resolution. \nBy Mr. COHEN: \nH.R. 4246. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, Section 8, Clause 3 \nBy Mr. CURBELO of Florida: \nH.R. 4247. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, Section 8, Clause 3, the Com-\nmerce Clause \nBy Mr. WESTMORELAND: \nH.R. 4248. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nThe Commerce Clause, Article I, Section 8, \nClause 3 of the Constitution states that Con-gress shall have power to regulate the regu-late Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the In-dian Tribes. \nBy Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia: \nH.R. 4249. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle 1, Section 8, Clause 18, ‘‘The Con-\ngress shall have the Power to . . . make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Pow-ers, and all other Powers vested by this Con-stitution in the Govenment of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.’’ \nBy Mr. BLUMENAUER: \nH.R. 4250. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nUS Const., Art. I, Sec. 8 providing Congress \nthe taxing authority. \nBy Mr. COFFMAN: \nH.R. 4251. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, section 8 of the United States \nConstitution, specifically clause 14 (relating to the power of Congress to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces), clause 16 (relating to the power of Congress to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia), and \nclause 18 (relating to the power of Congress to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying out the powers vested in Congress) \nBy Mr. FINCHER: \nH.R. 4252. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, Section VIII \nBy Mr. HASTINGS: \nH.R. 4253. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nU.S. Const. art. I, §8 \nBy Mr. KILMER: \nH.R. 4254. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, Section 8, Clause 3: Congress \nshall have the power to ‘‘regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states and with the Indian Tribes.’’ \nBy Mr. BEN RAY LUJA ´N of New Mex-\nico: \nH.R. 4255. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, Section 8, Clause 3 \nBy Mr. MURPHY of Florida: \nH.R. 4256. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle 1, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Con-\nstitution \nBy Mr. NUNES: \nH.R. 4257. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nClause 3 of section 8 of Article I of the \nUnited States Constitution; \nClause 18 of section 8 of Article I of the \nUnited States Constitution. \nBy Mr. ROSKAM: \nH.R. 4258. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, Section 8, Clause 1: ‘‘The Con-\ngress shall have Power To . . . provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.’’ \nArticle I, Section 8, Clause 3: ‘‘The Con-\ngress shall have the Power . . . To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.’’ \nArticle I, Section 8, Clause 18: ‘‘The Con-\ngress shall have the Power . . . To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Pow-ers, and all other Powers vested by this Con-stitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department of Officer thereof.’’ \nTenth Amendment: ‘‘The powers not dele-\ngated to the United States by the Constitu-tion, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’’ \nBy Mr. SENSENBRENNER: \nH.R. 4259. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle 1 Section 8 Clause 18 \nBy Ms. SINEMA: \nH.R. 4260. Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle I, Section 8 \nBy Mr. LOEBSACK \nH.R. 4261 Congress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nArticle 1 Section 8 Clause 4 of the US Con-\nstitution \nBy Mr. D\nEFAZIO: \nH.J. Res. 77. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:58 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\L15DE7.100 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9329 December 15, 2015 \nCongress has the power to enact this legis-\nlation pursuant to the following: \nClause 11, of Section 8, of Article I of the \nU.S. Constitution \nf \nADDITIONAL SPONSORS \nUnder clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors \nwere added to public bills and resolu-tions, as follows: \nH.R. 224: Mr. B RADY of Pennsylvania, Ms. \nWASSERMAN SCHULTZ , Mr. A LGREEN of \nTexas, Mr. S ERRANO , Mr. C OURTNEY , Mr. \nSMITH of Washington, Mr. C ARTWRIGHT , Mr. \nKENNEDY , and Mr. F OSTER . \nH.R. 239: Mr. M CNERNEY , Ms. Vela ´zquez, \nMr. L YNCH , Mr. C LAY, Mrs. D AVIS of Cali-\nfornia, Mr. L EWIS, Mr. M URPHY of Florida, \nand Ms. L ORETTA SANCHEZ of California. \nH.R. 320: Mr. C ARTER of Texas. \nH.R. 347: Mr. S TIVERS . \nH.R. 379: Mr. C OFFMAN and Mr. V ISCLOSKY . \nH.R. 448: Mr. T ONKO . \nH.R. 465: Mr. P EARCE and Mr. L ATTA . \nH.R. 539: Ms. G RAHAM , Mr. M EEKS , Mr. \nBRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. Q UIGLEY , Mr. \nRODNEY DAVIS of Illinois, and Mr. H ONDA . \nH.R. 556: Mr. B ERA \nH.R. 592: Mr. P OLIQUIN . \nH.R. 619: Mr. B ENRAYLUJA´Nof New Mex-\nico. \nH.R. 667: Mr. V ANHOLLEN . \nH.R. 699: Mr. K INDand Mr. R OTHFUS . \nH.R. 703: Mr. J ODYB. H ICEof Georgia. \nH.R. 721: Ms. B ASS. \nH.R. 746: Ms. E DWARDS , Mr. M ICHAEL F. \nDOYLE of Pennsylvania, and Ms. M ICHELLE \nLUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. \nH.R. 842: Mr. Y OHO, Mr. S TUTZMAN , Mr. \nMEEKS , and Mr. A SHFORD . \nH.R. 870: Mr. S EAN PATRICK MALONEY of \nNew York. \nH.R. 885: Mr. B ERA. \nH.R. 911: Mr. F ATTAH and Mr. R OSS. \nH.R. 921: Ms. B ROWN of Florida. \nH.R. 953: Mr. B RADY of Pennsylvania. \nH.R. 969: Mr. F ATTAH and Ms. T ITUS. \nH.R. 986: Mr. H ENSARLING and Mr. M CCLIN-\nTOCK . \nH.R. 990: Ms. T SONGAS . \nH.R. 1076: Ms. K ELLY of Illinois, Mr. C AR-\nNEY, and Mr. Q UIGLEY . \nH.R. 1093: Mr. J OHNSON of Ohio. \nH.R. 1116: Mr. J OYCE , Mr. D ENT, and Mr. \nROSKAM . \nH.R. 1142: Mr. C OSTELLO of Pennsylvania, \nMr. B ERAand Ms. F RANKEL of Florida. \nH.R. 1153: Mr. C ULBERSON . \nH.R. 1157: Mr. R UIZ. \nH.R. 1220: Mr. R UPPERSBERGER , Mr. H UN-\nTER, and Mr. B OST. \nH.R. 1258: Mr. L OWENTHAL , Mr. C OURTNEY , \nand Mr. Y ODER . \nH.R. 1312: Mr. W ALDEN . \nH.R. 1399: Ms. S TEFANIK . \nH.R. 1427: Mr. S ERRANO . \nH.R. 1453: Mr. R OKITA . \nH.R. 1457: Ms. M ENGand Mr. T IPTON . \nH.R. 1475: Mr. K ING of Iowa and Mr. \nGALLEGO . \nH.R. 1559: Mrs. M CMORRIS RODGERS . \nH.R. 1608: Mr. L YNCH . \nH.R. 1692: Mr. K ENNEDY . \nH.R. 1726: Ms. W ILSON of Florida. \nH.R. 1728: Mr. B ENRAYLUJA´Nof New Mex-\nico. \nH.R. 1733: Mr. T IPTON . \nH.R. 1747: Ms. F RANKEL of Florida. \nH.R. 1751: Ms. W ILSON of Florida. \nH.R. 1818: Mr. P ERLMUTTER . \nH.R. 1854: Mr. M EEKS . \nH.R. 1877: Mr. C ARSON of Indiana. \nH.R. 1942: Mr. K ENNEDY and Mr. \nLOWENTHAL . \nH.R. 1964: Mr. P ERLMUTTER . \nH.R. 2016: Mr. K ILMER and Mr. M ICHAEL F. \nDOYLE of Pennsylvania. H.R. 2017: Mr. B ROOKS of Alabama. \nH.R. 2023: Mr. T AKAI. \nH.R. 2096: Mr. T HOMPSON of California. \nH.R. 2123: Mr. K INGof New York. \nH.R. 2138: Mr. K IND. \nH.R. 2191: Mr. T EDLIEUof California. \nH.R. 2217: Ms. W ILSON of Florida. \nH.R. 2257: Mrs. N APOLITANO . \nH.R. 2278: Mr. J ONES and Mr. D UNCAN of \nTennessee. \nH.R. 2293: Mr. C ULBERSON , Mr. Y ODER , Mr. \nLOWENTHAL , Mr. C OLE, and Mr. C OURTNEY . \nH.R. 2302: Mr. S COTT of Virginia. \nH.R. 2315: Mr. C ASTRO of Texas. \nH.R. 2411: Mr. L OWENTHAL , Mr. T ONKO , and \nMs. M OORE . \nH.R. 2430: Mr. T AKANO , Mr. G RAYSON , and \nMr. D ANNY K. D AVIS of Illinois. \nH.R. 2513: Mr. G ALLEGO . \nH.R. 2515: Mr. C A´RDENAS and Mr. K ELLY of \nPennsylvania. \nH.R. 2519: Ms. S CHAKOWSKY . \nH.R. 2540: Mr. B ERA. \nH.R. 2635: Ms. M ENG. \nH.R. 2646: Mr. F RELINGHUYSEN . \nH.R. 2680: Mr. L OWENTHAL . \nH.R. 2689: Mr. K ILMER . \nH.R. 2694: Ms. D ELBENE. \nH.R. 2713: Mr. Y OUNG of Alaska. \nH.R. 2716: Mr. W EBSTER of Florida. \nH.R. 2726: Ms. F RANKEL of Florida. \nH.R. 2737: Mr. T ROTT , Mrs. W AGNER , and \nMs. H AHN. \nH.R. 2739: Mr. F ORTENBERRY and Mr. \nSCHIFF . \nH.R. 2759: Mr. G RIJALVA and Ms. S INEMA . \nH.R. 2763: Mr. K IND. \nH.R. 2775: Ms. D UCKWORTH . \nH.R. 2849: Ms. E DWARDS , Mr. C OFFMAN , Ms. \nMICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico, \nand Mr. B RADY of Pennsylvania. \nH.R. 2858: Mr. L OWENTHAL and Mr. L YNCH . \nH.R. 2871: Mr. E NGEL . \nH.R. 2896: Mr. C ONAWAY . \nH.R. 2903: Mr. N EWHOUSE , Ms. S EWELL of \nAlabama, and Ms. S INEMA . \nH.R. 3040: Mr. P ERLMUTTER . \nH.R. 3051: Ms. F UDGE , Mr. C LEAVER , Ms. \nKELLY of Illinois, Ms. M OORE , Ms. C ASTOR of \nFlorida, Ms. M ATSUI , and Mr. I SRAEL . \nH.R. 3179: Mrs. E LLMERS of North Carolina. \nH.R. 3187: Mr. R OHRABACHER . \nH.R. 3284: Mr. G RIJALVA , Mr. H ASTINGS , Mr. \nCONYERS , Mr. D OLD, and Mr. E NGEL . \nH.R. 3309: Mrs. C OMSTOCK . \nH.R. 3314: Mr. W OMACK . \nH.R. 3326: Mr. P OLIQUIN . \nH.R. 3339: Mr. F RELINGHUYSEN , Mr. V EASEY , \nMr. B EYER , Mrs. K IRKPATRICK , Mr. \nCA´RDENAS , and Mr. C OLLINS of New York. \nH.R. 3355: Mr. Y ARMUTH , Ms. W ILSON of \nFlorida, and Mr. B ENRAYLUJA´Nof New Mex-\nico. \nH.R. 3356: Mr. L ARSEN of Washington. \nH.R. 3366: Ms. W ILSON of Florida. \nH.R. 3381: Mr. S ENSENBRENNER and Ms. \nSCHAKOWSKY . \nH.R. 3384: Mrs. N APOLITANO . \nH.R. 3406: Ms. S LAUGHTER . \nH.R. 3411: Ms. J ACKSON LEEand Mr. Y AR-\nMUTH . \nH.R. 3437: Mr. M CCLINTOCK . \nH.R. 3441: Mrs. B LACK . \nH.R. 3497: Mr. C OHEN . \nH.R. 3514: Ms. D ELBENE. \nH.R. 3520: Mr. J OHNSON of Ohio. \nH.R. 3565: Mr. B ERAand Mr. C A´RDENAS . \nH.R. 3606: Mr. O’R OURKE . \nH.R. 3646: Mr. P OMPEO . \nH.R. 3654: Mr. C ICILLINE , Mr. B RENDAN F. \nBOYLE of Pennsylvania, and Ms. J ACKSON \nLEE. \nH.R. 3666: Ms. P INGREE . \nH.R. 3691: Ms. M ICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of \nNew Mexico. \nH.R. 3694: Mr. R OYCE . \nH.R. 3706: Mr. P ITTENGER , Mrs. W ATSON \nCOLEMAN , Mr. B EYER , Mr. S ENSENBRENNER , \nand Mr. B ERA. H.R. 3719: Ms. S TEFANIK . \nH.R. 3722: Mr. H URDof Texas. \nH.R. 3742: Mrs. C OMSTOCK . \nH.R. 3786: Ms. W ILSON of Florida. \nH.R. 3790: Mr. C A´RDENAS and Mr. R YAN of \nOhio. \nH.R. 3793: Ms. L EE. \nH.R. 3808: Mr. T IBERI and Mr. H UIZENGA of \nMichigan. \nH.R. 3832: Ms. F RANKEL of Florida and Mrs. \nCOMSTOCK . \nH.R. 3861: Ms. W ILSON of Florida. \nH.R. 3870: Mr. P ERLMUTTER . \nH.R. 3880: Mr. J OHNSON of Ohio and Mr. \nWEBSTER of Florida. \nH.R. 3886: Ms. W ILSON of Florida, Mr. K IL-\nMER, and Mrs. N APOLITANO . \nH.R. 3914: Mr. C ARTER of Georgia. \nH.R. 3926: Ms. S CHAKOWSKY , Mr. P OLIS, Ms. \nLOFGREN , Mr. C ARSON of Indiana, Mr. \nTAKANO , Mr. Y ARMUTH , and Ms. J UDYCHUof \nCalifornia. \nH.R. 3927: Ms. B ROWNLEY of California. \nH.R. 3940: Mr. B ERA, Mr. H ARPER , Mr. B UCK, \nMs. P INGREE , Ms. S EWELL of Alabama, Mr. \nPOSEY , and Mr. A SHFORD . \nH.R. 3947: Ms. W ILSON of Florida and Ms. \nFRANKEL of Florida. \nH.R. 3948: Ms. W ILSON of Florida and Ms. \nFRANKEL of Florida. \nH.R. 3957: Ms. F RANKEL of Florida. \nH.R. 3963: Mr. J ONES and Mr. L IPINSKI . \nH.R. 3965: Mrs. N APOLITANO . \nH.R. 3970: Ms. S TEFANIK , Mr. H IGGINS , Mr. \nCARSON of Indiana, Ms. S LAUGHTER , and Mr. \nFOSTER . \nH.R. 3990: Ms. L EE, Ms. S INEMA , Ms. \nGABBARD and Ms. E SHOO . \nH.R. 4016: Mr. B OUSTANY . \nH.R. 4018: Mr. M ILLER of Florida, Mr. R OO-\nNEYof Florida, and Mr. P ITTENGER . \nH.R. 4055: Mr. T AKANO . \nH.R. 4058: Ms. S TEFANIK . \nH.R. 4080: Mr. K ILDEE . \nH.R. 4087: Mr. D EUTCH . \nH.R. 4108: Mr. J ONES . \nH.R. 4117: Mr. C OHEN . \nH.R. 4138: Mr. D OLDand Mr. F ARENTHOLD . \nH.R. 4144: Mr. K EATING . \nH.R. 4153: Mr. B ILIRAKIS . \nH.R. 4162: Mr. P OCAN , Mr. P RICE of North \nCarolina, Mr. C ARTWRIGHT , Mr. T ONKO , Ms. \nLEE, and Mr. S WALWELL of California. \nH.R. 4177: Mr. M ILLER of Florida. \nH.R. 4179: Mr. T ONKO . \nH.R. 4180: Ms. D UCKWORTH . \nH.R. 4183: Mr. W ALBERG . \nH.R. 4184: Mr. F ARR, Mr. B LUMENAUER , Mr. \nGRIJALVA , Mr. M CGOVERN , Mr. P OCAN , and \nMr. R YANof Ohio. \nH.R. 4185: Mr. R OGERS of Kentucky, Mr. \nBUCSHON , Mr. W HITFIELD , Mr. L YNCH , Mr. \nMARINO , and Mrs. R OBY. \nH.R. 4186: Mr. Z INKE. \nH.R. 4197: Mrs. B LACK and Mr. L ATTA . \nH.R. 4209: Mr. J EFFRIES , Mr. R ANGEL , and \nMr. B ENRAYLUJA´Nof New Mexico. \nH.R. 4211: Mr. H IMES and Ms. S INEMA . \nH.R. 4229: Ms. S LAUGHTER . \nH.R. 4233: Ms. L ORETTA SANCHEZ of Cali-\nfornia. \nH.R. 4238: Mrs. B USTOS , Mr. M EEKS , Mrs. \nNAPOLITANO , Mr. V ARGAS , Ms. S PEIER , Mr. \nRANGEL , Miss R ICEof New York, Mr. C ON-\nYERS , Mrs. W ATSON COLEMAN , Ms. L ORETTA \nSANCHEZ of California, and Mr. P ETERS . \nH.R. 4240: Mr. G OODLATTE , Mr. S ENSEN -\nBRENNER , Mr. R ICHMOND , Mr. Pierluisi, Mr. \nCOHEN , Ms. S INEMA , and Mr. R ANGEL . \nH. J. Res. 74: Mr. H ENSARLING . \nH. Con. Res. 56: Mr. H OLDING . \nH. Res. 14: Mr. A USTIN SCOTT of Georgia. \nH. Res. 54: Mr. D ENHAM . \nH. Res. 112: Ms. P INGREE . \nH. Res. 265: Mr. G ALLEGO . \nH. Res. 289: Mr. C OHEN . \nH. Res. 290: Mr. M ILLER of Florida. \nH. Res. 394: Mr. C OHEN . \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE7.023 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H9330 December 15, 2015 \nH. Res. 417: Mr. G RAVES of Missouri and \nMr. B OUSTANY . \nH. Res. 432: Mr. C OLLINS of New York, Mr. \nBERA, and Mr. C RAMER . \nH. Res. 469: Mr. D IAZ-BALART . H. Res. 527: Ms. W ILSON of Florida. \nH. Res. 548: Ms. L OFGREN and Mr. C OHEN . \nH. Res. 552: Ms. M ENG. \nH. Res. 554: Mr. T AKANO , Mr. F ARENTHOLD , \nMs. B ONAMICI , and Mr. M EEKS . H. Res. 558: Mr. H IGGINS . \nH. Res. 562: Mr. H UFFMAN and Mr. \nSWALWELL of California. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE7.021 H15DEPT1SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE Congressional RecordUNUMEPLURIBUS\nUnited States\nof America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 114th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION\n∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.\n.S8647 Vol. 161 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2015 No. 182 \nSenate \nThe Senate met at 10 a.m. and was \ncalled to order by the President pro tempore (Mr. H\nATCH ). \nf \nPRAYER \nThe Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of-\nfered the following prayer: \nLet us pray. Eternal God, thank You for listening \nto our prayers. May our lawmakers use fervent prayer to solve problems and to experience Your wonderful peace. Help the citizens of this land to join our Senators in using intercession to bring healing to our Nation and world. \nLord, thank You for Your promise \nthat if we call You when facing trou-ble, You will deliver us. Lift the light \nof Your countenance upon our Nation and world, O Lord, and let Your will be done. Let there be peace on Earth, and let it begin in each of our hearts. Give us minds that are wise with wisdom, hearts that are warm with faith, and lips that are eloquent with truth. \nWe pray in Your sacred Name. Amen. \nf \nPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE \nThe President pro tempore led the \nPledge of Allegiance, as follows: \nI pledge allegiance to the Flag of the \nUnited States of America, and to the Repub-lic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY \nLEADER \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. C OT-\nTON). The majority leader is recog-\nnized. \nf \nAPPROPRIATIONS AND TAX \nRELIEF NEGOTIATIONS \nMr. M CCONNELL. Mr. President, as \nof this morning we know that commit-tees and Members from both sides are continuing to make important progress in the ongoing fiscal negotiations. That is true on the appropriations side, and it is also true on the tax relief side. \nNOTICE \nIf the 114th Congress, 1st Session, adjourns sine die on or before December 24, 2015, a final issue of the Congres-\nsional Record for the 114th Congress, 1st Session, will be published on Thursday, December 31, 2015, to permit Members \nto insert statements. \nAll material for insertion must be signed by the Member and delivered to the respective offices of the Official Reporters \nof Debates (Room HT–59 or S–123 of the Capitol), Monday through Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. through Wednesday, December 30. The final issue will be dated Thursday, December 31, 2015, and will be delivered on Monday, January 4, 2016. \nNone of the material printed in the final issue of the Congressional Record may contain subject matter, or relate to \nany event, that occurred after the sine die date. \nSenators’ statements should also be formatted according to the instructions at http://webster.senate.gov/secretary/ \nDepartments/Reporters lDebates/resources/cong lrecord.pdf, and submitted electronically, either on a disk to accompany \nthe signed statement, or by e-mail to the Official Reporters of Debates at ‘‘Record@Sec.Senate.gov’’. \nMembers of the House of Representatives’ statements may also be submitted electronically by e-mail, to accompany \nthe signed statement, and formatted according to the instructions for the Extensions of Remarks template at https ://housenet.house.gov/legislative/research-and-reference/transcripts-and-records/electronic-congressional-record-inserts. \nThe Official Reporters will transmit to GPO the template formatted electronic file only after receipt of, and authentication with, the hard copy, and signed manuscript. Deliver statements to the Official Reporters in Room HT–59. \nMembers of Congress desiring to purchase reprints of material submitted for inclusion in the Congressional Record \nmay do so by contacting the Office of Congressional Publishing Services, at the Government Publishing Office, on 512– 0224, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. daily. \nBy order of the Joint Committee on Printing. \nGREGG HARPER, Chairman. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:07 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 8633 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.000 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8648 December 15, 2015 \nThis doesn’t mean negotiators have \nsurmounted every obstacle, but it does offer an unmistakable sign of forward momentum. Negotiators are working toward filing legislation today and ex-pect to do so. Many will find that en-couraging. For my part, I will continue engaging and consulting colleagues as events move forward. \nf \nRECOGNITION OF THE MINORITY \nLEADER \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nDemocratic leader is recognized. \nf \nOMNIBUS AND TAX EXTENDERS \nNEGOTIATIONS \nMr. REID. Mr. President, as my \nfriend, the Republican leader, stated, we are continuing to work toward a bi-partisan compromise on the omnibus and tax extenders legislation. I have worked hard—we have all worked hard—to get to yes on this massive un-dertaking, this huge appropriations bill and this big tax bill. I have been in-volved on a personal basis in every twist and turn of the way. \nI want to say a word about the sta-\ntus. We all know that this agreement is not completed, but I have been so im-pressed with the endurance and the massive amount of experience that these men and women have—both Democrats and Republicans. Senator M\nCCONNELL and I had an event last \nweek. We sat next to one another. I sent him a note about how impressed I was with one of his staff people who is working intimately with one of mine. \nSo I want to tell all the staff in all \nthese buildings here on Capitol Hill who have been working on this night and day how much I appreciate their hard work and how the American peo-ple are so fortunate to have these good men and women working on their be-half. We find that most everyone en-gaged and working here on Capitol Hill are not involved for the money. They are involved because they want to do something to help change policy and to try to do what they can to be involved in what goes on in this great country. So I appreciate all they have done to this point. \nI think we have done a good job as re-\nsponsible legislators, working to find common ground and strike a balance that can pass Congress and be signed into law by the President. But it is time for a reality check on where we stand on things. \nAn agreement could be filed right \nnow that covers most everything that we have discussed and would keep the government funded fully for a year. At this point, the only major outstanding issue is Republicans’ insistence on rais-ing the export ban on crude oil. \nWe have made very clear to Repub-\nlicans that if they insist on including the oil export ban, there must be in-cluded in this robust policies to reduce our carbon emissions and encourage the use of renewable energy. So for the past many days I have worked hard—as \na number of others have—to strike the right balance. We have made multiple offers to Republicans that were cer-tainly doable, reasonable, and all Re-publicans had to do was say yes. Say-ing yes to any of the offers we put on the table dealing with renewables over the past few days—especially the last 3 days—the ink would be dry, the entire package would be filed, and we would be moving ahead on the floor. I made it very clear to my Republican colleagues that there are offers out there that have been unanswered, and I hope they are answered very quickly. \nI have appreciated getting to know \nthe Speaker better than I did before. I found him to be available and someone who understands the policy, and I am encouraged that last night he said when he had his teleconference with all of his Members that he thought we were going to have a deal completed. I hope that in fact is the case. \nRepublicans can take yes for an an-\nswer. That is all they have to do. But Congress is now faced with two clear paths forward. The first is very simple: Pair the oil export ban with much needed policies to reduce our carbon emissions and build more renewable energy. The second path is that we move ahead on the government funding bill and tax package without the pack-age of oil and renewable policies. That would not be my first preference, but we would have to live with it. \nWe don’t have the legislative lan-\nguage yet on the tax package. This isn’t pointing fingers at anyone ad-versely. It is simply the fact that we need to get this done. We don’t have the legislative language done yet. At this pace, we are going to be here through Christmas. We need to get that done now. \nSo these are the two choices. Either \npath forward will keep the government open and funded. I certainly hope so. Republicans must decide which they prefer. \nIf Republicans think reducing our \ncarbon emissions and encouraging the use of renewable energy is an unaccept-able price to pay, we can move the rest of the package without the oil export ban, but we need not delay anymore. There is no reason to delay any fur-ther. \nSo I say to everyone who is listening \nhere this morning: It is decision time. \nMr. President, would the Chair an-\nnounce the business of the day. \nf \nRESERVATION OF LEADER TIME \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Under \nthe previous order, the leadership time is reserved. \nf \nMORNING BUSINESS \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Under \nthe previous order, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 5 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest \nthe absence of a quorum. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe senior assistant legislative clerk \nproceeded to call the roll. \nMr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nMARKETPLACE FAIRNESS ACT \nMr. DURBIN. Mr. President, 2 years \nago Members of the Senate did some-thing that doesn’t happen very often. We broke through the gridlock and came together to pass meaningful bi-partisan legislation that was called the Marketplace Fairness Act. Senator M\nIKEENZI, a Republican from Wyo-\nming, has been the leader on this issue from the start. Senator L\nAMAR ALEX-\nANDER , a Republican from Tennessee, \nhas been an invaluable ally. Senator H\nEIDIHEITKAMP , a relatively new Mem-\nber of the Senate but a person with ex-traordinary knowledge of this field, joined me and 65 others to pass legisla-tion that would level the playing field for Main Street businesses all across America and allow States and local-ities to collect sales and use taxes that are already owed under the law. \nSince that time—that glorious time 2 \nyears ago—what has happened? Noth-ing—the bill passed the Senate, went to the House, and disappeared. \nIn the face of this obstruction, a bi-\npartisan group of Senators have said we will oppose any long-term extension of legislation that would take away a State’s right to collect taxes on access-ing the Internet unless we give States the ability to collect taxes on Internet sales that are already owed. \nThe Internet Tax Freedom Act is a \nlaw which is going to expire with the continuing resolution—which I would support—and it says that States and localities cannot impose a tax on ac-cess to the Internet. I think that is sound policy. But what we are asking in return is to allow those who use the Internet to make retail purchases to pay the sales taxes they already owe for their purchases. It is that simple. It is not fair to tie the hands of States and localities to collect the revenue they need to fund law enforcement, public schools, infrastructure, and other vital services without providing a path for States and localities to re-place the revenue if they choose. \nThe Marketplace Fairness Act levels \nthe playing field for retailers by allow-ing States to treat all retailers— whether it is a brick-and-mortar store or online—the same when it comes to collecting sales and use taxes. It is not a new tax. We are talking about exist-ing taxes and their collection. In Illi-nois we have a quaint way of dealing with this. I recall a few years ago, when I was doing my State income tax returns, the bookkeeper called and said: Do you want to declare your \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.002 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8649 December 15, 2015 \nInternet purchases and pay the sales \ntaxes you owe? I said: Of course I want to pay the taxes I owe. How do you do that? \nWell, you declare them on your State \nincome tax return in Illinois. There is no proof. It is your word, and the fact that you sign is what the State goes by. I estimated my Internet purchases that had not been subject to sales tax and paid the appropriate tax in Illinois. It turns out that very few people in my State who actually do make retail pur-chases over the Internet pay this tax. We are trying to change that. The change is very simple: If you are an Internet retailer, such as Amazon—the largest in the United States—and I make a purchase for the holidays and I declare my ZIP Code at the end of my address, Amazon then knows by my ZIP Code how much to be collected in sales tax. They assess me that with the purchase, take that amount and send it back to the Illinois Department of Rev-enue for distribution. It is so simple that there is basic software available, at a very modest cost, that any retailer can use to make that same calculation. There is nothing exotic or difficult in the process, but that is what is miss-ing. \nAmazon—I use them as an example— \nactually collects sales tax, and they support our marketplace fairness bill, as do many other Internet retailers. The difficulty we have run into, though, is there is a resistance to giv-ing fairer treatment to stores across America that are collecting sales taxes every day against retailers on the Internet that may or may not collect those taxes themselves. \nWhat difference does it make? I have \ntalked to some of the people who run big chain stores, and they say it has reached a point that something has to be done. Consumers come into a store, a major store, and they ask to see cer-tain products—running shoes, bicycles, flat-screen TVs. They pick the one they like the best, write down all the information about it, and they are never seen again. Some of them do have the nerve to return at a later date when they make their purchase over the Internet to the bricks-and-mortar store when they are dissatisfied with the product. Of course the bricks and mortar store had nothing to do with the sale of the product. They are being asked to provide some consumer rela-tions on a product they didn’t even sell. \nWhat is happening? Take a look at \nthe last Thanksgiving holiday week-end—one of the biggest retail weekends of the year. Early reports suggest that the stores on Main Street and shopping malls across America had flat sales compared to last year. How about Internet retail sales for that weekend? They were up significantly across America. \nWhat we are looking for is parity and \nsome equality. It is not fair to say to the store down the block that is paying the rent, paying the property taxes, and collecting the sales taxes that we \nare going to put them at a disadvan-tage to their Internet competitors. Internet retailers benefit under our current system, sadly, because they don’t charge for sales tax—many of them don’t. They have a 5-percent or 10-percent advantage over Main Street competitors. When you ask many of these Internet retailers whether they want to continue the current system, they say: Of course, it gives us a break. \nIt is not fair, it is not right, and it \nshould be changed. Products sold on-line seem cheaper when sales and use taxes are not collected at the point of sale, but we all know that tax is still owed by the customers. Thousands of \nMain Street businesses have worked hard to grow their businesses. They employ local people. Now they have be-come nothing but show rooms because of this unfairness. Examples: Steve Sahli from Play It Again Sports in Naperville, IL, knows this issue of showrooming all too well. For more than 20 years, Play It Again Sports has been serving the Naperville, IL, com-munity. People come into the store, they try out big-ticket items, use their phones sometimes to take a picture, walk out the door, and buy the item online. \nSoccer Plus in Palatine, IL, is an ex-\nample of what happens when it be-comes too difficult to compete with on-line retailers because of their price ad-vantage. Two years ago, Soccer Plus went out of business. We lost good-pay-ing jobs in Palatine, and Palatine lost a business that was paying its property taxes, employing all the people, and sustaining the services of that good city. There is nothing we can do for Soccer Plus now, but we can still help other retailers avoid that same fate. \nEven with countless stories like \nthese, the House of Representatives has refused to address this issue. Numerous requests to the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to mark up e- fairness legislation from ranking mem-bers and other members have not re-sulted in any action whatsoever. The chairman of the House Judiciary Com-mittee is calling for regular order when it comes to e-fairness legislation but has refused to even hold a legislative hearing on the only e-fairness legisla-tion to be introduced in the House. That was by Representative J\nASON \nCHAFFETZ , a Republican from Utah. He \nintroduced the bipartisan Remote Transactions Parity Act. We have worked on a bipartisan basis in the Senate with Congressman C\nHAFFETZ , \nCongressman W OMACK , and others to \ncome up with a bill that we think is fair that can pass. All we are asking for is a day in court—a legislative hearing, a markup, and bring the matter to the floor of the House. The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has re-fused to work with us on this legisla-tion. He has his own approach. I dis-agree with it, but let’s have the debate. Let’s have the vote. Isn’t that what Congress is supposed to be all about? These calls for regular order are noth-\ning more than veiled attempts to delay and obstruct in the House. Let’s have regular order. Let’s bring up the Chaffetz measure. If the chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the House has his own alternative, let him offer that as well. \nWhile House leadership calls for reg-\nular order on legislation to level the playing field for Main Street retailers, they bypassed regular order by airdropping a permanent extension of the Internet Tax Freedom Act into a totally unrelated bill. It was a bill in Customs relating to trade agreements. At the very last minute, they dropped in this provision for the permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act. \nThe same Members of Congress call-\ning for regular order on e-fairness leg-islation skipped regular order when it came to the Internet Tax Freedom Act. Last week, the Customs reauthoriza-tion conference report, which reformed some of our Customs and trade law, was released. Many were surprised to find deep in the bill on page 381 a brand new provision that had nothing to do with Customs, nothing to do with trade, has not had a recent hearing in the Senate and was dropped in at the last minute in this bill—the permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act. \nThis provision wasn’t in the bill that \npassed either the House or the Senate. It is what happens toward the end of the legislative session when things go bump in the dark. Internet Tax Free-dom Act hasn’t even been considered by this body. Yet there it was in a con-ference report meant to resolve dif-ferences that had been debated for months. \nI do not support the permanent ex-\ntension of the Internet Tax Freedom Act in the conference report. I am going to oppose any other attempt to move anything longer than the remain-ing 9-month extension of the Internet Tax Freedom Act until September 30, 2016. I support the merits of the legisla-tion, but it is grossly unfair to speed this through with an airdrop in a con-ference report without any hearing and to do it at the disadvantage of retailers and businesses across America. \nA long-term extension of the Internet \nTax Freedom Act should be paired with the Marketplace Fairness Act. We can make them both permanent law. Let’s do it and do it together. Let me explain why. We should not cut off States and localities at the knees by preventing them from collecting tax revenues, by reducing Federal funding, and without also providing State and local govern-ments the authority to collect the taxes already owed. The Federal Gov-ernment has cut funding for States and local governments over the last several years in an attempt to put the Federal Government on the right fiscal path. Tough decisions have had to be made. Many States and local governments are struggling, even in my State. In a one- two punch, some in Congress want to increase this burden by permanently \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.008 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8650 December 15, 2015 \npreventing States and localities from \nimposing certain types of taxes while denying them the authority to collect sales and tax revenue that is already owed to them. \nIn 2015 alone, my State of Illinois \nwill lose at least $390 million under the Internet Tax Freedom Act. Chicago will lose $197 million. Springfield will lose $6 million. How do we expect States and localities to fund first re-sponders, firefighters, emergency serv-ices, 911 dispatch, health care services, local road maintenance, and all the other services that support our com-munity? Unlike the Federal Govern-ment, States and localities can’t run deficits to continue these services. The only option they have is to raise other taxes, such as property taxes, or to cut vital services. \nThere is a reasonable path forward. \nCongress should pass both a long-term extension of the Internet Tax Freedom Act—which says we will not impose State and local taxes on access to the Internet—and pass the Marketplace Fairness Act, which allows States to opt in so Internet retailers selling in their State will collect the sales tax due and remit to the States and local-ities. \nI hope my colleagues in the House \nwill work with me to do that. I wel-come the opportunity to have a serious dialogue about how to move both pieces of legislation forward in an ex-peditious manner. \nMr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, will the \nSenator yield to me for just a moment? \nMr. DURBIN. I am happy to yield to \nmy friend and colleague from Vermont. \nMr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I hope \nboth Senators and Members of the other body listened to what the distin-guished senior Senator from Illinois just said. We all extol the virtues of Main Street America—small towns, big towns. I think of the businesses I go into every time I am home in Vermont. These are hard-working people. They are people who support the Little League, the Boy Scout troops, help with all the various charitable drives. And they’re being treated unfairly. \nWhat the Senator from Illinois said \nis absolutely right. There are two dif-ferent issues. Let’s start leveling the playing field. Let’s start worrying as much about the citizens of our own community, the people who make our communities work, as we do about some conglomerate that none of us ever see, and our communities never see. So I am proud to say I strongly support what the Senator from Illinois has done. \nI yield the floor. Mr. DURBIN. I thank the Senator \nfrom Vermont for his comments. \nI yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe senior assistant legislative clerk \nproceeded to call the roll. \nMr. COONS. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nNUCLEAR AGREEMENT WITH IRAN \nMr. COONS. Mr. President, today our \nNation is distracted by grave concerns, by threats abroad and at home, by con-cerns about our economy and our peo-ple. I stand here today to call on us to continue to be focused on something that is not currently at the top of the news but on something that is a press-ing and ongoing national concern. We need to be strictly and aggressively en-forcing the terms of our nuclear deal with Iran that we reached with a vari-ety of our other international partners and that is currently moving forward. We need to push back on Iran’s bad and disruptive behavior, not just in its re-gion but globally, and give our admin-istration and international agencies the resources and the nominees con-firmed that will allow them to be suc-cessful in enforcing our actions against Iran. \nA few short months ago, if you asked \nanyone what topics would be at the top of the list of America’s foreign policy conversation or the upcoming Presi-dential campaign, you would have been hard-pressed to find anyone who didn’t mention the Iran nuclear agreement front and center. It completely cen-tered the debate in this Chamber and around the country last summer and fall. What a difference a few months can make. \nThis morning many of us are deeply \nconcerned about an alleged bomb threat in Los Angeles that is causing hundreds of thousands of school-children to be sent home mid-school-day. And in response to the recent and horrific attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, we are focused on identi-fying weaknesses in our border secu-rity and in finding ways to protect the American people without compro-mising our fundamental values. \nWe are rightly focused on expanding \nthe U.S.-led coalition to defeat ISIS and on finding a way to assist our al-lies in providing safe haven to some of the millions of refugees fleeing terror and chaos abroad. Sadly, we are also distracted by a Republican Presidential primary in which a leading candidate has cast aside the Constitution in favor of incendiary rhetoric. That is why I rise today to make sure we remain fo-cused on one of America’s most impor-tant challenges to the United States and our key allies, including, centrally, Israel, which is enforcing the terms of the nuclear deal with Iran. \nOn September 1, after a long study \nand real reflection and significant de-bate, I ultimately announced my sup-port for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or the JCPOA, also known as the Iran nuclear agreement. Just over a week later, the review period ended and Congress failed to reject the deal, so it moved forward. The agreement took effect a month and a half later on October 18, known as adoption day, when Iran agreed to give the Inter-\nnational Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, dramatically expanded inspec-tion and verification powers. We are \nnow 3 months into the JCPOA, and I want to take this opportunity today to assess areas where the Obama adminis-tration and our international partners have done well over the past 3 months and to highlight areas where we must do more. \nSince adoption day, we have seen \nsome progress and some real setbacks on implementing the terms of the deal. \nFirst the positives, and there are \nsome. Iran has begun to reconfigure its plutonium nuclear reactor at Arak so it can no longer produce materials nec-essary for a nuclear weapon. The gov-ernment has also started to dismantle its enrichment centrifuges and its in-frastructure that would have enabled it to use uranium as a nuclear weapon in the short term. The IAEA has also con-tinued to make preparations to mon-itor and verify the deal and to increase its number of inspectors on the ground, to deploy modern technologies to mon-itor Iran’s declared nuclear facilities, and to set up a comprehensive over-sight program of Iran’s centrifuge man-ufacturing facilities and its entire nu-clear fuel cycle, from uranium mines, to mills, to enrichment facilities. \nThese steps are promising, but by no \nmeans do they tell the complete story of Iran’s bad behavior since this deal was reached, nor do these few positive steps indicate that implementing the terms of this deal going forward will be anything less than exceptionally dif-ficult. In fact, not only will enforce-ment of this deal be incredibly tricky, but I believe how effectively and ag-gressively we enforce the JCPOA in these early months and years will set the table for how we respond when Iran commits violations later. Whether we respond now when Iran commits minor violations around the boundaries of the nuclear deal will send a critical mes-sage to our allies and adversaries alike. \nI am confident that the actions taken \nby the United States and our allies to counter and restrain Iran and the Mid-dle East, especially in these early months of the deal, will profoundly im-pact Iran’s behavior going forward. \nThat brings me to less positive news. \nWhen I announced my support for the JCPOA last September, I made it clear that it was based on a deep suspicion of Iran, an inherent distrust of their in-tentions, and a clear-eyed commitment to aggressively oversee and enforce the terms of the deal. \nMy concerns proved justified on Oc-\ntober 22 when Iran concluded a ballistic missile test in clear violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1929. Those unlawful tests came just days after adoption day under the JCPOA. Last week, before the U.N. Security Council could finish their investiga-tions and take any concrete actions, we heard reports of a second Iranian ballistic missile test on November 21. \nI fear the Iranians are taking action \nafter action in this area and others to \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.009 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8651 December 15, 2015 \ndemonstrate that they are willing to \nflout international rules, regulations, and restrictions. And in the absence of our decisive action, these misdeeds by the Iranians will simply continue and escalate. \nToday, a new report from the IAEA \ngives further justification to the dis-trust shared by supporters and oppo-nents of the nuclear deal. The IAEA re-port on the so-called possible military dimensions—or PMD—of Iran’s nuclear program found ‘‘that a range of activi-ties relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device were con-ducted in Iran prior to the end of 2003 as a coordinated effort, and some ac-tivities took place after 2003.’’ These activities included computer modeling that took place as recently as 2009. \nThe PMD report details just how de-\ntermined Iran has been to develop nu-clear weapons capability. Iran devel-oped detonators. Iran experimented with explosives technology. Iran en-gaged in computer modeling of a nu-clear explosive. Iran even set up orga-nizations specifically dedicated to nu-clear weapons activity. It is not hard to connect those dots, and the IAEA did. That agency found that Iran en-gaged in efforts to demolish, remove, and refurbish facilities related to test-ing nuclear weapons components. Its government also offered misleading ex-planations of its past nuclear behavior. \nIt is equally important to note what \nthe IAEA did not find. Iran’s weapons program didn’t advance beyond an ex-ploratory stage. The IAEA found no in-dication there was a whole undeclared nuclear fuel cycle in Iran or that Iran held significant amounts of undeclared uranium. \nDespite the ambiguous nature of this \nreport, I think the take-away is clear: Iran’s nuclear weapons-related activi-ties and its sustained determination to hide and obfuscate its behavior rein-force our justifications for ongoing dis-trust of the Iranian Government and for the strict monitoring and verifica-tion of the components of the nuclear deal. \nMy colleagues and I have access to \nclassified material, meaning we know more than is publicly known about the extent and direction of the nuclear weapons program in Iran. But the IAEA report is important because it es-tablishes a baseline for Iran’s program, for our assessment of their breakout time, and for our knowledge of how far they have gotten in weaponization. Knowledge of these efforts is critical to our future enforcement of this deal. \nThe IAEA report also reaffirms that \nas implementation of the deal moves forward, the international community must continue to seek and consider in-formation about Iran’s past nuclear ac-tivity. In my view, the IAEA must maintain its ability to continue re-viewing any new information related to Iran’s past nuclear weapons program, and we have to continue to assertively investigate any new accusations of Ira-nian covert activity or malfeasance. We have to continue to counter \nIran’s rogue actions—which only serve to isolate Iran on the world stage—by continuing to enforce sanctions with-out exception and be prepared to im-pose new sanctions if and when Iran’s behavior warrants it. For example, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Na-tions, Samantha Power, was right to immediately shine a spotlight on the recent ballistic missile test I recently cited and to call for a U.N. Security Council investigation promptly. When that investigation is completed, the Security Council should act, but if it doesn’t, I hope and expect that the ad-ministration is ready to enforce a se-ries of unilateral American actions, in-cluding direct sanctions against those Iranians responsible for this violation. While these ballistic missile tests are outside the parameters of the JCPOA, our response has to be strategic, and we have to make sure Iran knows it can’t continue to simply and blatantly disregard the international community and the U.N. Security Council. \nSince the announcement of the \nJCPOA, the Treasury Department has taken steps to target Iran’s malign ac-tivity in the region. In November, the Treasury Department designated three Hezbollah procurement agents and four companies in Lebanon, China, and Hong Kong for purchasing dual-use technology on behalf of Hezbollah. These sanctions followed actions in July against three senior Hezbollah military officials in Syria and Lebanon who were providing military support to the Syrian regime and an additional Hezbollah procurement agent who served as the point person for the pro-curement and transshipment of weap-ons and materials for the group and its Syrian partners for at least 15 years. \nThese designations also follow Treas-\nury’s actions during negotiations over the JCPOA when the Department uti-lized multiple authorities and sanc-tioned more than 100 Iranians and Iran- linked persons and entities, including more than 40 under its ongoing ter-rorism sanction authorities. \nIn November, Treasury also partici-\npated in the U.S.-Gulf Cooperation Council Working Group on Iran, through which participants discussed our joint efforts to counter Iran’s sup-port for Hezbollah, for the Assad re-gime, and for other militant proxies in the region. That working group con-tinues to improve information sharing and cooperation to take joint actions targeting Iran’s support for terrorism and its other destabilizing activities in the region and around the world. \nIn early December, Saudi Arabia \nagreed to designate 12 Hezbollah offi-cials for terrorism, further disrupting their ability to raise and move funds around the gulf. \nImplementing this agreement suc-\ncessfully will demand that we continue to develop discrete, clear, and public responses to minor Iranian violations of the agreement. My view on this was shaped in no small part by advice I got from a dear, long-term friend in New \nYork, Maurice, who told me about his experience decades ago negotiating a complex commercial deal with Iran. After 2 years of excruciating and de-tailed back-and-forth negotiations, he told me they sat at the table to sign their agreement and begin their com-mercial partnership. After shaking hands across the table, the lead Iranian negotiator said: Now, my friend, the negotiations begin in earnest. \nAll of us who have studied Iran’s be-\nhavior and know the history of their work to conceal their nuclear weapons program and their work to destabilize the region know that Iran will cheat on this agreement. They will litigate the boundaries. They will find ways large and small to test us. \nFor example, the nuclear agreement \nbars Iran from enriching beyond 3.67 percent. How will we respond if, for ex-ample, for a month Iran claims it acci-dentally enriched to 4 percent? We are unlikely to snap back the full multilat-eral sanctions regime because such a \nmove would have little support in the international community for such a small and transient infraction and could be perceived as an overreaction. But inaction is not an option either. In coordination with our allies, we must develop a menu of responses that allow us to respond quickly and precisely to minor violations of the deal because there are no real minor violations of the deal. Otherwise Iran will little by little eat away at the constraints of this agreement, and our deterrence and credibility will collapse. \nIn addition to deploying sanctions \nmore effectively and ratcheting them up as necessary, the international com-munity must also increase our efforts to push back against Iran’s malign ac-tivity in the Middle East. More specifi-cally, we have to enhance our cam-paign of interdicting Iranian weapons shipments and support to its proxies in Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon. Iran sends illicit arms shipments to terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis who pass through inter-national waters, and under both domes-tic and international law, the United States maintains its authority to dis-rupt these shipments. We must use that authority to act and to dem-onstrate our will. We must use that au-thority to work with our partners in the region and our allies around the world to increase the tempo and scope of our interdiction efforts. Successful interdiction efforts not only get deadly weapons out of the hands of terrorists but also deter Iran and undermine its proxies throughout the Middle East. \nWe know we can be successful in this \naspect of our enforcement because the administration has already success-fully disrupted Iranian weapons ship-ments in recent months. Although many of us have been briefed in a clas-sified setting about encouraging devel-opments in this area, I think it is im-portant that we have at least one ex-ample that we can share with our col-leagues and the world. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.004 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8652 December 15, 2015 \nPlease take a look at this picture to \nmy left. In September, a raid off the coast of Yemen seized a large cache of Iranian arms destined for the Houthi rebels who seek to undermine the le-gitimate Yemeni Government. This massive weapons shipment included a whole series of the component parts of sophisticated TOW missiles, including 56 tube-launched, optically tracked, wire-guided TOW missiles and the asso-ciated sights, mounts, tubes, battery sets, launcher assemblies, guidance systems, battery assemblies, and near-ly 20 other sophisticated anti-tank weapons. I commend the administra-tion for these efforts and for this suc-cessful interdiction in international waters, but we cannot stop there. \nEvery month while Iran negotiates \nwith the international community with one hand, with the other hand it has been sending millions of dollars’ worth of weapons to the murderous Assad regime in Syria, to Hezbollah in Lebanon, and to the Houthis in Yemen. We must not stand by while Iran con-tinues to spread its terror and desta-bilize this region. Nor is it sufficient simply to increase our interdiction ef-forts. We must publicize these efforts when successful. \nWhen an American smalltown sheriff \npulls off a successful drug bust, we bet-ter believe that sheriff is going to hold a press conference and put on the table the drugs and guns taken off the streets. Actions like that send a simple signal to those who engage in the drug trade that there is a sheriff in town who is actually going after bad actors and who isn’t going to tolerate this de-stabilizing and illegal activity. \nI think the American people and the \ninternational community need to know about Iran’s bad behavior and our will-ingness to take effective actions to push back. Just as importantly, Iran needs to know that the international community remains serious about cracking down on its illegal arms ship-ments and its promotion of terror. \nI am committed and I am willing and \nready to help the administration in-crease its interdiction efforts in any way I can. A shared commitment to this from my colleagues—a shared focus on this from my colleagues—is especially important today when many members of the administration and the American people are understandably focused elsewhere: on our Presidential election next year, on the global ref-ugee crisis, and on recent terrorist at-tacks and the conflict with ISIS. \nThese are busy times. As the holi-\ndays approach and as Congress nears a massive budget deal, I see my col-leagues and my constituents focusing less and less on Iran, but we must maintain our focus for the months and years to come. Given the 24/7 news cycle and the media’s incessant focus on the crisis of the moment, we will be tempted to turn our attention else-where. \nAdoption day was not the end of the \nagreement with Iran. In fact, it sig-nified just the beginning. And we must \nthink strategically about the Middle East, which critically includes Iran as the central promoter of terrorism and source of destabilizing action in the re-gion. \nWe must redouble our efforts to fol-\nlow through on the most rigorous en-forcement of the JCPOA or face ter-rible consequences. We have to scruti-nize Iranian actions ever more closely for signs it is reneging on its commit-\nments. This JCPOA is set to last in principle for 15 years but in some terms indefinitely. Congress must not waiv-er—not for 1 day—in our oversight of the implementation of this agreement. \nWhether my colleagues supported or \nopposed the deal, we should put our dif-ferences about that aside and focus on enforcement. The deal is designed to deter Iran from evading or cheating on the deal while also countering Iranian bad activity in the region. That is why I worked with a group of my colleagues to introduce the Iran Policy Oversight Act in September. This bill, cospon-sored by supporters and opponents of the JCPOA, helps ensure the United States aggressively enforces the terms of the nuclear deal. The Iran Policy Oversight Act also provides support for our friends in the Middle East, most centrally our vital and steadfast ally, Israel. \nI am pleased to hear the administra-\ntion is working on negotiating a new 10-year memorandum of understanding for Israel’s security, and I am pleased to hear that its assistance will con-tinue to grow to ensure Israel main-tains its qualitative military edge. \nIn recent weeks, I have also had the \nchance to discuss the Iranian deal and our intention to continue to enforce the sanctions that remain on the books and to interdict and to push back against Iran’s destabilizing regional ac-tivities. When I was in Paris at the global climate conference, I had the chance to discuss this issue with French Government officials and busi-ness leaders. I will continue these ef-forts in early January when I will trav-el with seven other Senators to the Middle East and to Europe to discuss our progress implementing this nuclear deal and the challenges that remain. \nI commend President Obama and his \nadministration for engaging with Con-gress during the debate over the Iran agreement and in the months since it took effect, but I urge the administra-tion not to lose focus and to work with this Congress in the months ahead to ensure strict enforcement of the agree-ment. \nBut we in Congress have our part to \ndo here as well, not the least of which is making sure the executive branch has capable and effective officials, which is a crucial part of effective im-plementation. In recent months, not only has the Senate not done its job, but this Chamber’s inaction and our apparent focus instead on Presidential politics means we are increasingly making this Chamber less relevant in American foreign policy. The United States has a very quali-\nfied and capable leader in the enforce-ment of sanctions in Adam Szubin, who oversees the current imposition and en-forcement of sanctions at the Depart-ment of Treasury. Mr. Szubin worked under the Bush administration and under the Obama administration. He is a dedicated, capable, seasoned career professional who has been widely com-plimented on a bipartisan basis by \nmembers of the Banking Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee on which I serve. He has been nomi-nated to be the new Under Secretary of Treasury for Terrorism Financing—a position critical to the successful en-forcement of the JCPOA—but his nomi-nation has been on hold for months for no clear and publicly stated reason. \nAdam Szubin’s nomination is one of \nmore than two dozen national security- related nominations, including Tom Shannon, nominated to be the Under Secretary of Political Affairs at the State Department. Tom Shannon is a career Foreign Service officer and a de-termined, dedicated, nonpartisan pro-fessional who also would play a critical role in working with our allies and en-suring successful enforcement of this agreement. \nAdam Szubin, Tom Shannon, and \nnearly two dozen other nominees have been blocked, seemingly for purely par-tisan reasons in this Senate. I call on my colleagues to release their holds and to give the administration the re-sources and the personnel it needs to do its job in enforcing this difficult deal. \nThe Senate’s commitment to over-\nseeing and enforcing the terms of this deal must go beyond simply doing our job and giving the President’s nomi-nees an up-or-down vote. We have to do more. I stand ready to work with this President and the next one to fully oversee the JCPOA. The length of this agreement will transcend Presidential terms, and implementing it should transcend politics as well. \nWe know Iran will seek every oppor-\ntunity to push the limits of this deal in an attempt to test our resolve. We must not let Iran relitigate the terms of the deal and escape the boundaries of this deal and lay the groundwork for its future development of a nuclear weapon. We must deter them by hold-ing them accountable. \nWhen this President or a future \nPresident, Republican or Democrat, successfully enforces this deal, I will be the first one to compliment them for countering Iran’s destabilizing activity in the region. And when the adminis-tration, current or future, isn’t ac-tively and vigorously enforcing this deal and pushing back on Iran, I will be the first to ask—to demand—that it do more. \nThe Iranian Government is paying \nclose attention to everything we do, and I, for one, am determined to make sure that Congress, the administration, and the American people are doing the same, to demonstrate to Iran our de-termination and our will to deter them \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.006 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8653 December 15, 2015 \nand to closely and vigorously enforce \nthis difficult deal. \nThank you, Mr. President. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe senior assistant legislative clerk \nproceeded to call the roll. \nMr. LEE. Mr. President, I ask unani-\nmous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. C\nAS-\nSIDY). Without objection, it is so or-\ndered. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO BOYD MATHESON \nMr. LEE. Mr. President, I rise today \nto pay tribute, bid farewell, and, coin-cidentally, to wish a 1-day belated birthday to a truly extraordinary gen-tleman from Cedar Hills, UT, who is a dear friend, a trusted partner, and one of the finest human beings I have ever known. For nearly 4 years, Boyd Matheson has served my Senate staff ably and honorably, first as State di-rector and then for the last 3 years as chief of staff. He has served with spe-cial distinction on Team Lee, so much so that as far as my staff and I are con-cerned, we are all on Team Boyd. I can say with confidence and a great deal of gratitude that without Boyd Matheson I would not be here today. \nI first met Boyd about 12 years ago \nwhen he and his wife Debbie and their five children moved into my neighbor-hood. They had just returned to Utah after spending more than a decade out-side the State and in places as far away as Australia while Boyd was building his successful consulting business. I could tell right away that Boyd felt at home in Utah, as well he should. After all, the State was settled by Boyd’s an-cestors, who came to Utah in the 1850s in search of a place where they could worship, believe, and live as they saw fit without fear of persecution. \nWhile Boyd’s ancestors helped settle \nthe State in the 19th century, his par-ents, who raised an impressive 11 chil-dren, helped populate our State in the 20th century. I soon got to know Boyd, who was active in many of the same ec-clesiastical and political causes in which I was involved, and I was imme-diately struck by his masterful com-mand of the English language. Boyd wasn’t given to excessive speech, but when he spoke people listened. I no-ticed that everything Boyd said was at once profound, disarming, inviting, persuasive, and informative—a rare combination. Not much has changed since then. To this day, listening to Boyd speak is an uplifting experience for all who are fortunate enough to be present. \nAlthough it would be several more \nyears before I got to know Boyd very well, I quickly identified him as some-one whose opinion mattered to me and to others and whose skills as a commu-nicator I deeply admired. Whenever anyone I knew was in need of advice on how to communicate an important \nmessage, I referred them to Boyd, as-suring them with great confidence that this was a man who had an uncanny ability not only to say the right things but also to say them in just the right way. \nFor that very reason, when I began \nconsidering running for the Senate, Boyd was one of the very first people I called. As one who had never pre-viously sought or held public office, I knew that the odds were highly stacked against me, to put it mildly. With an instinctive trust in his judg-ment, I understood that I would need Boyd’s help in order to have any plau-sible chance of winning. \nI still remember the first of what \nwould be countless conversations that would take place over the next few months. I was on my way home from work late one evening when I placed the call. I wasn’t sure whether he would tell me I was out of my mind or whether he would provide encourage-ment, nor was I even sure which answer I would prefer. Nevertheless, I knew, regardless of his response, that I should listen carefully to his assessment of my ideas. \nTo his credit, and consistent with his \nthoughtful, careful approach, he didn’t give me a definitive answer imme-diately. Instead, he asked for time to think about it, suggesting that we con-tinue to visit periodically over the next few months, and this we did. In due time, we both came to the same con-clusion. \nWhen I entered my Senate race in \n2010, I asked Boyd to serve as my com-munications director. I knew that his distinctive vision for the future, his commitment to positive reform, and his unparalleled gifts for communica-tion would provide my campaign with the direction, clarity of purpose, and optimism it would need to have any chance of success. \nI was right. Boyd was the perfect \nman for the job. He proved to be indis-pensable to the campaign, quickly earning an appropriate and very de-scriptive nickname. We often referred to him not simply as Boyd but by his longer and appropriate nickname, which was ‘‘Boyd to the rescue.’’ \nYou see, just weeks into the cam-\npaign my wife Sharon christened him ‘‘Boyd to the rescue’’ because she no-ticed that he could solve just about any problem, that his calming reassur-ance had a positive effect on everyone around him, and that somehow things just went more smoothly when he was around. \nWith Boyd’s help I was elected in No-\nvember 2010. Then, when it was all over and I made plans to transition to Washington, I invited him to join my Senate staff. While disappointed, I was not surprised that he opted to remain in Utah, returning to his career as a \nbusinessman and a consultant, a career which I had rather rudely interrupted a year earlier. \nYou see, Boyd is not your typical \nchief of staff. Indeed, he is very unlike most of the people you will find in this \ntown—or in any town, for that mat-ter—in the best and most admirable ways imaginable, Boyd didn’t ascend to his post by working his way up Wash-ington’s political pecking order, biding his time until it was his turn. No, he spent the bulk of his career—which, I would add, is just still getting start-ed—outside of politics, starting and running his own businesses to serve others and to create true value in soci-ety, and he began doing this at a very early age. In high school, Boyd ran sports camps where he taught kids in his community the fundamentals of how to succeed on the field, on the \ncourt, and in life. This has been the Boyd Matheson business model ever since he was in high school and started his first business—inspiring, teaching, and helping those around him to suc-ceed, though his target audience has changed over time from youth athletes to business executives, foreign dig-nitaries, long-shot political candidates, and eventually, thankfully, this Sen-ator from Utah. \nBoyd agreed to join my campaign not \nbecause he had any political aspira-tions or ambitions of his own; he just wanted to make a difference. He knew that our country was headed down the wrong track and that his fellow Utahns and Americans in every State were fac-ing challenging times ahead. He want-ed to help however he could, but it wasn’t until he had spent a year criss-crossing the State and the country with my campaign that Boyd realized the magnitude of the economic and so-cial challenges facing the United States. He met countless families and hardworking Americans anxious about their country’s future and struggling just to keep up. He visited far too many isolated, forgotten communities that were stuck in poverty with few op-portunities and even fewer reasons for hope. And he got a glimpse into the po-litical dysfunction plaguing and, at the same time, perversely enriching Wash-ington, DC. \nBy the end of the campaign, I could \ntell that Boyd knew the road to eco-nomic recovery and social revival in America would be long and arduous, but I also knew he cared enough about his family, his community, his State, and his country that he would do just about anything to be part of the solu-tion. So when Boyd decided not to pur-sue a job on Capitol Hill after the cam-paign, deep down I knew that, God will-ing, he would be back. \nThankfully, God was willing and so \nwas Boyd. If my first year in the Sen-ate taught me anything, it was that I needed Boyd Matheson’s help to sur-vive in Washington. So on December 5, 2011, as my first year in office was com-ing to a close, I decided to call him and ask him to take a job as my State di-rector. Here again, I wasn’t sure what his answer would be, but I knew I need-ed to ask. It was an offer I hoped he might accept. Not only had I given him ample time to forget about all the late \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.007 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8654 December 15, 2015 \nnights and early mornings of the cam-\npaign, but the job I was offering him would allow him to stay in Utah most of the time, at least for the time being. \nIn the end, it was providence that \nsealed the deal. When I called Boyd to offer him the job, I was at the airport in Salt Lake City traveling back to Washington after a weekend at home with my family. After a few minutes of small talk and catching up on the phone, Boyd asked me where I was at the moment. I told him I was at the airport. \n‘‘Me too,’’ he said, adding that he was \non his way to Bangkok. ‘‘Which air-port?’’ \n‘‘Salt Lake City,’’ I replied. ‘‘Me too,’’ said Boyd. ‘‘Which con-\ncourse,’’ he asked. \n‘‘D,’’ I said. ‘‘Me too,’’ Boyd repeated again. \n‘‘Which gate,’’ Boyd asked, as we both started looking around the crowded terminal. \nBefore I could respond, we had both \nspotted each other sitting with only a few chairs between us in the waiting area adjacent to gate 6. \nWe continued the conversation in \ngate D–6 in person and then via text message once we boarded our respec-tive flights—mine to Washington and Boyd’s to Thailand. Eventually he ac-cepted the offer, convinced that our \nchance encounter in the airport that day was, as his wife Debbie would later put it, an ‘‘inspired connection.’’ \nIt was inspired, indeed, but the con-\nnection was not just between Boyd and me; it was a connection between a man and his moment, between Boyd and the countless people whose lives have been forever changed because of his faithful service over the last 4 years. And no one has been more blessed than I have. \nBoyd has been my constant ally, spir-\nitual coach, advocate, speaking surro-gate, and friend. In addition to his many skills and attributes, so many of which are well-known to anyone who has interacted with my office, Boyd possesses a deep and genuine concern for others. Coupled with his freakishly intuitive sixth sense, this makes Boyd the consummate friend and indispen-sable teammate. \nFor reasons I don’t entirely under-\nstand but appreciate more than he can possibly know, Boyd has the extraor-dinary ability to know when, where, and how he is most needed long before anyone else does, long before the per-son who needs him knows. \nYears ago I lost track of how many \ntimes Boyd had sensed that I was wor-ried about something and then he im-mediately called or texted—invariably with exactly the right words that ad-dressed my concerns. \nThis, of course, is not part of the \nchief of staff job description in my of-fice; it is just what Boyd does, not only for me but for everyone he knows. I can’t count the number of times he has stepped in to help me, my family, and my staff in moments of need without having been asked and often at great personal sacrifice. Considering how hard he works to \nhelp others, many of us who know and work with him often ask: Does this man ever sleep? \nThis, in turn, has sparked a number \nof half-joking suggestions among my staff that Boyd Matheson is actually a vampire, one who survives on Diet Coke rather than blood and rarely, if ever, sleeps. When we ask him whether he will ever take the rest that he needs and most certainly deserves, he relies on a well-worn response, saying, ‘‘I have promises to keep, and miles to go before I sleep.’’ The literary world rec-ognizes these as the words of Robert Frost, but my family, my staff, and I will always attribute them to Boyd. By word and by deed, he made these words his anthem. \nNeedless to say, Boyd has kept his \npromises and has more than earned his right to sleep. Yet, somehow, knowing Boyd as I do, I doubt he will hold still for long. Boyd Matheson at his core is a passionate reformer. He is exactly the kind of reformer with exactly the kind of courage and convictions that are so badly needed but too often in short supply here in Washington. \nBoyd is, in the words of essayist Wil-\nliam George Jordan, one of the reform-ers of the world: \n. . . its men of mighty purpose. They are \nmen with courage of individual convictions, men who dare run counter to the criticism of inferiors, men who voluntarily bear crosses for what they accept as right, even without the guarantee of a crown. They are men who gladly go down into the depths of silence, darkness, and oblivion, but only to emerge finally like divers—with pearls in their hands. \nAsk Boyd what pearls he has found in \nWashington and he will tell you, with-out pause or hesitation, ‘‘the people.’’ It is the people he will miss the most, which is exactly the kind of answer you would expect from Boyd—a man who genuinely cares about people. No matter who you are or how your path happened to cross with his, Boyd lis-tens to and learns from you, he inspires and teaches you, and he always sees the best in everyone, challenging each of us to do the same. \nI am most fortunate to know Boyd \nMatheson and to call him my friend. I am most thankful for his sacrifice and that of his wife Debbie and their five children, who have seen on so many oc-casions the sacrifice of this great man in the service to me, to my staff, and to others. The people of Washington, DC, are going to miss Boyd Matheson, and the people of the great State of Utah will be lucky to have him back. \nI yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe legislative clerk proceeded to \ncall the roll. \nMr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. COMBATING ANTI-SEMITISM, RAC-\nISM, AND OTHER FORMS OF IN-TOLERANCE \nMr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I have \nhad the honor of being the ranking Democrat for the U.S. Senate on the Helsinki Commission. I work with Sen-ator W\nICKER , who is the Senate chair-\nman of the Helsinki Commission. The two of us have worked very hard on many issues. \nAs I am sure everyone here knows, \nthe Helsinki Commission is the imple-menting arm for U.S. participation in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe—the OSCE. It is probably best known for its human rights basket. It does deal with secu-rity, military security. It does deal with economic and environmental se-curity. But I think it is best known for its human rights and the impact human rights have on the security of the OSCE region. \nIn March of this year, the president \nof the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Coopera-tion in Europe, Mr. Ilkka Kanerva, ap-pointed me to serve as the assembly’s first special representative on anti- Semitism, racism, and intolerance. Since that time, I have focused my work on the urgent issue of anti-Semi-tism and community security, anti- Muslim bigotry, and discriminatory po-licing. So let me share with my col-leagues the work I have done this year on behalf of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and on behalf of all Members of the Senate. \nMy appointment came after horrific \nback-to-back terrorist attacks in Paris and Copenhagen in January and Feb-ruary. In both instances, Jewish insti-tutions were targeted—a kosher super-market in Paris and a synagogue in Co-penhagen. In both instances, some symbol associated with free speech was also attacked. In Paris, a murderous \nrampage was unleashed against the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. In Copenhagen, a conference on free speech, where a Danish cartoonist was among the speakers, was attacked. \nI subsequently visited both cities, \nalong with Senator W\nICKER and Rep-\nresentative A DERHOLT , fellow members \nof the Helsinki Commission. Following our trip, I authored Senate provisions to increase State Department funding to combat anti-Semitism and other forms of discrimination in Europe and cosponsored Senator M\nENENDEZ ’s reso-\nlution on anti-Semitism. That resolu-tion supports national strategies to combat and monitor anti-Semitism and hate crimes, including training law enforcement and collecting relevant data. I am pleased that our State De-partment has advanced many of the ef-forts outlined in these legislative pro-visions through OSCE and civil society initiatives. \nI have also focused on the problem of \ndiscriminatory policing. This summer, Hungary’s Commissioner for Funda-mental Rights issued an important re-port on community policing in Hun-gary’s second largest city, Miskolc. He \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:07 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.012 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8655 December 15, 2015 \nconcluded that police had participated \nin mass, raid-like joint controls, exe-cuted with local government authori-ties, public utility providers, and other public institutions, without explicit legal authorization and predominantly in segregated areas inhabited mostly by Roma. In short, police targeted Roma for harassment, fines, and daily indignities. \nFor those of us who listened to Attor-\nney General Holder present the Depart-ment of Justice’s report on Ferguson last March, the Hungarian Commis-sioner’s report has the feeling of deja vu—many differences, to be sure, but similar in that critical community confidence in law enforcement has been abused and damaged. \nI have sought to address these issues \nwith several pieces of legislation, in-cluding S. 1056, the End Racial Profiling Act; S. 1610, officially named the BALTIMORE Act, Building and Lifting Trust in Order to Multiply Op-portunities in Racial Equality, and S. 2168, the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act. Among other provisions, these laws would ban racial profiling by State and local law enforcement, es-tablish mandatory data collection and reporting, and address the issues of po-lice accountability and building trust between police departments and com-munities by providing incentives for local police organizations to volun-tarily adopt performance-based stand-ards to reduce misconduct. \nIn the OSCE, where discriminatory \npolicing issues have been documented from the United Kingdom and France to Russia, I have urged the chair-in-of-fice to hold a high-level meeting on racism and xenophobia focused on con-crete action. \nFollowing the most recent tragedies \nin Paris and San Bernardino, there has been a backlash of hatred directed against the asylum seekers, immi-grants, and Muslims in many OSCE countries, often fueled by populist or extremist parties, such as Le Pen in France, UKIP in Great Britain, the True Finns in Finland, Swedish Demo-crats, Austrian Freedom Party, or Golden Dawn in Greece. Worse still, this kind of xenophobia bleeds into the discourse of mainstream parties. As such, I will add an increased focus on prejudice and discrimination linked with the migration and refugee crisis to my priorities. \nIn addition to focusing on anti-Semi-\ntism and discriminatory policing and the anti-Muslim backlash, I will also look at the protection of migrants and refugees, as that is becoming an area of discrimination that is troubling in the OSCE region—including in our own country of the United States. I am par-ticularly troubled by the spike in vio-lence in our own country directed at houses of worship and community cen-ters—fueled by escalating anti-Muslim discourse. In Palm Beach, FL, vandals broke all the windows at the Islamic Center, ransacked the prayer room, and left bloody stains throughout the center. That cannot be tolerated in our \ncountry. A number of mosques have re-ported receiving death threats or mes-sages of hate. A pig’s head was thrown at a Philadelphia mosque, shots were fired at a mosque in Connecticut, and a fake bomb was left at a Virginia mosque not far from where we are here today in the U.S. Capitol. \nI disagree in the most emphatic way \npossible with those who would have us call for excluding people from this country based on their faith, and lim-iting political participation based on religion. That is not who we are. Those are not our values. \nThe images of Jewish refugees on SS \nSt. Louis turned away, port after port, \nmany of whom ultimately perished in death camps, and the image of Amer-ican citizens, including children, im-prisoned in internment camps solely because of their race, are dark corners of our own history. We must be careful not to retread that path. It is one rea-son I question those who describe ter-rorism as a Muslim problem. Such statements prevent our communities from working together against a com-mon threat. The slaughter of school-children in Columbine, the massacre of churchgoers in Charleston, and the Oklahoma City bombings were not White problems just because the per-petrators were White; neither should the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino be distilled as Muslim prob-lems. \nRadicalization is a very real problem \nthat currently tries to exploit the Mus-lim community, but it is our problem— Muslims Jews, Christians, Whites, Latinos, Blacks, all Americans—to all come together to solve this problem. \nWhen I see the young people who en-\ngaged in these horrible acts, I question why they were susceptible to such great untruths that would allow them to harm themselves and others. No family should have to lose their moth-er, son, or cousin to mass shootings. No family should have to live with the fear that their loved ones were the per-petrators of mass violence. We must work together to guard against such ideologies that would steal our young people from us. \nGiven that the United States is his-\ntorically a nation built upon immigra-tion and the tenets of religious free-dom, Americans have long lived along-side others and have seen people of dif-ferent faiths live together in peace. Muslims have lived in America since the colonial days and served under the command of George Washington. There are an estimated 5,900 Muslims who currently serve in our armed services defending our country and our way of life. When the Supreme Court ruled this summer in favor of a young Mus-lim woman who allegedly suffered em-ployment discrimination because of her head scarf, Justice Scalia an-nounced the 8-to-1 decision, noting, ‘‘This is really easy.’’ Neither immi-grants nor Muslims are new to our shores. Islam is also not new to Europe. Eu-\nrope’s own historic relationship with the rest of the globe has set the stage for ties that have long served as the backbone of prosperity for the Western world. Europeans have created a pres-ence throughout the world—and that is a two-way street. Many countries in the OSCE region, including our own, therefore have a learned history of in-tegration that can be useful in address-ing the increasing diversity stemming from the refugee crisis and changing demographics. \nGiven the conflicts that have forced \nmass displacement and migration, we should support long-term inclusion and integration efforts at the national, re-gional, and local level throughout the OSCE region—especially with the lead-ers of humanitarian efforts for Syrian and other refugees—such as what is being done today in Turkey, Germany, Sweden, Austria, and OSCE partner states such as Jordan and Lebanon. They are taking on tremendous bur-dens for the refugees because they know it is the right thing to do. They need partners, including the United States. \nThe successful integration of immi-\ngrants and refugees—including access to quality housing, education, employ-ment, and public services—facilitates meaningful intellectual, economic, and other contributions of migrants and refugees that are especially critical for children. These are areas in which our nations should exchange experts and information. \nEarlier this year, I introduced provi-\nsions in the Senate for a Joint Action Plan between the United States and the European Union to formulize and coordinate public and private sector anti-discrimination and inclusion ef-forts. We need diverse coalitions work-ing together to address the momentous threats we face today. This includes leading by example by providing fac-tual information about refugees and immigrants and publicly addressing narratives of hate. It is in that spirit that I will continue to work with other parliamentarians and with the admin-istration to combat anti-Semitism, racism, and other forms of intolerance in the United States and elsewhere in the OSCE region. I will do that as the special representative of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, and I will do that as a U.S. Senator. \nMr. President, I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from Wyoming. \nf \nPARIS CLIMATE CHANGE AGREE-\nMENT AND SENATE ACCOM-PLISHMENTS \nMr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, over \nthe weekend, countries meeting in Paris signed a broad new climate agreement. President Obama called the \nagreement a success. He said it was a ‘‘strong agreement.’’ \nDespite the fanfare, let’s keep some \nthings in perspective. There are impor-tant parts of this agreement that can \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:07 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.015 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8656 December 15, 2015 \ndo a great deal of damage to American \njobs and the American economy. That should be and is a big concern to the American people. Parts of the agree-ment can do damage to our jobs and our economy. At the same time, impor-tant parts are not binding on other countries. The American people are right to wonder if the White House has signed yet another terrible deal just to try to shore up the President’s legacy. \nEarlier this year, President Obama \nwas so anxious, so desperate to get a deal with Iran over its nuclear program that the President signed a terrible deal. Since then, the International Atomic Energy Agency said that Iran has ‘‘seriously undermined’’ the agen-cy’s ability to verify what Iran has done. Here we are again. It is another bad deal, and other countries that signed it are already ignoring it. \nIndia is the world’s third largest \nemitter of carbon. The agreement was on Saturday. This agreement tied plans to meet their emissions targets to get-ting U.S. taxpayer dollars. Then on Monday—just yesterday—India said it has plans to double its coal output by 2020. Is that what President Obama calls, in his mind, a success? \nA Gallup poll came out yesterday \nthat showed that the American peo-ple’s biggest concern is not climate change; it is terrorism. Only 3 percent of all Americans said that pollution or the environment was the most impor-tant problem facing America today. \nPresident Obama says climate \nchange is our biggest threat. President Obama continues to put a priority on things that he expects to help his leg-acy, not on the issues the American public actually are concerned about. As elected representatives, we should not allow the President to buy a legacy for himself using American taxpayer dol-lars. I am willing to sit down with any Democrat who wants to work on a real-istic, responsible, and achievable plan to make American energy as clean as we can, as fast as we can, without rais-ing costs on American families. That should be our goal: coming together to find a real solution, real-world solu-tions, things that work, not just sign-ing a symbolic agreement that does not solve anything, something that may make the President feel good but doesn’t actually do good. \nDemocrats and Republicans in the \nSenate can do it. Just look at all we have accomplished this year working together. It has been a very productive year in the Senate. I am not the only one saying it. Last Wednesday, U.S. News & World Report said: ‘‘There’s reason for optimism on Capitol Hill ahead of a looming deadline to pass a trillion-dollar omnibus funding meas-ure.’’ The magazine asked: ‘‘What is be-hind it?’’ Well, they said: ‘‘After years of partisan gridlock, Congress has seemingly regained its ability to get things done.’’ \nAfter years of partisan gridlock, Con-\ngress has seemingly regained its ability to get things done. The bipartisan pol-icy committee said the same thing re-\ncently. They pointed out that the House and Senate have both made im-portant progress this year. They said: ‘‘Both chambers have reinvigorated a robust committee process.’’ \nGetting committees back to work is \nessential to getting Congress back to work, and that is what Republicans have done this year. So far this year, the total number of days worked is up from last year by almost an additional 3 weeks of work on the Senate floor. This is in comparison to when H\nARRY \nREIDwas in charge. We have been con-\nsidering a lot more amendments this year as well. For all of last year, there were only 15 up-and-down votes on amendments—15 for the entire year. So far this year, we have voted on over 200 amendments. These are amendments both by Democrats and Republicans. These are opportunities for individual Senators to stand up, offer their ideas, and be heard—ideas that they think will make America better, make legis-lation better, not just what the leader of the party wants, Senator R\nEID, who \nblocked so many amendments—not just what Senator R\nEIDmight think is \nbest for the President, no; what the American people think is important. \nSo when you look into the substance \nof what we have done, the news is even better for the American people. So far this year we passed major legislation that has been helping Americans all across the country. We passed an im-portant law on Medicare to make much needed reforms and to reauthorize the Children’s Health Insurance Program. We passed the first multiyear highway bill since 2005. We passed the longest reauthorization of the highway trust fund in almost a decade. \nThese aren’t just short-term patches \nfor a few months or a year. That is what happened when the Democrats were in charge. These are long-term fixes that create the certainty and the stability our economy needs. This year the Senate passed the most significant education reform since 2002. We passed an important human trafficking law. We passed a budget. Can you imagine that? There hasn’t been a budget passed in both Houses of Congress since 2009. We passed one this year. \nAs chairman of the Indian Affairs \nCommittee, I can tell you that we have made a lot of progress this year on leg-islation to improve the lives of people across Indian Country. We passed a measure that will help make crucial and long overdue improvements on roads on tribal lands. Last week we passed legislation that helps give tribes more economic opportunities. It gives them more control over developing their natural resources. \nRepublicans are eager to work with \nDemocrats and to produce legislation the President will sign. We are proud of the accomplishments of this year. At the same time, we are not afraid to challenge President Obama’s most mis-guided and dangerous policies. That is why the Senate passed legislation re-pealing ObamaCare to ease Americans’ \npain under this law. We passed a meas-ure on the Keystone XL Pipeline to create jobs, energy security, and eco-nomic growth, and we put that bill on the President’s desk to force him to fi-nally make a decision. \nWe challenged President Obama’s \njob-crushing energy regulations by vot-ing to block his power plan and his dev-astating rules on waters of the United States. I wish to point out, looking at a headline from yesterday’s New York Times, that EPA broke the law with regard to pushing their water rule. The EPA broke the law, which is this issue of this whole waters of the United States. The EPA must be held account-able—accountable for breaking the law, accountable for misuse of government funds. We will hold this administration accountable. \nOf course we also oppose the Presi-\ndent’s nuclear deal with Iran. We have shown the American people we can get things done, and there is a viable alter-native to the reckless policies coming out of the White House. \nLooking back on what we have been \nable to do this year, I think there is real reason for optimism. The Senate doesn’t need to be the place of gridlock that it had become under H\nARRY REID. \nIn 2016 the Senate will be taking more votes on important legislation and on amendments. There will be more de-bates, more consideration of ideas from both sides of the aisle. That is what the American people have sent us to do. That is what they expect from us. The American people have seen it is pos-sible to govern and that not everything in Washington is broken. It takes lead-ers who are committed to getting things done and committed to looking out for the best interests of the Amer-ican people. \nThis is the end of the year, but it is \nnot the end of this Congress. It is not the end of what the Senate can do to make the lives of the American people better. We have done a lot. There is still a lot of work to be done over the next month and the next year. We will continue to work to relieve the burden and the expense of excess government regulations, to reduce the power of unelected, unaccountable Washington bureaucrats, and to return to the States and to the people more of the control that belongs to them. The goal is to give people at home the power to make their own decisions about what is best for them, their communities, and their families. \nMr. President, I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. \nR\nOUNDS ). The Senator from New Mex-\nico. \nf \nNOMINATION OF ROBERTA \nJACOBSON \nMr. UDALL. Mr. President, I rise to \nurge consideration of the President’s nominee for Ambassador to Mexico. I do so for two simple reasons: One, this is a critical position, vacant since \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.016 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8657 December 15, 2015 \nJuly, and, two, Roberta Jacobson is \nhighly qualified for this position. Her nomination deserves our attention. I do so as a Senator from a border State and as a Senator who believes we have a constitutional duty to advise and consent. \nWe have a distinguished candidate \nready to serve. We have strong support for her on both sides of the aisle. What we need is an up-or-down vote. The L.A. Times has called Roberta Jacobson ‘‘among the most qualified people ever to be tapped to represent the U.S. in Mexico.’’ \nShe has impressive experience, in-\ncluding important work on the Merida Initiative, fighting drug trafficking and organized crime in Mexico. She has served ably as State Department As-sistant Secretary for the Western Hemisphere, working to improve rela-tions in our hemisphere and to engage Cuba—opening opportunities for Amer-icans after over 50 years of a failed U.S. policy. \nShe was approved by the Senate For-\neign Relations Committee with bipar-tisan support. Yet the weeks go by and still we wait. \nOur relations with Mexico are crit-\nical—affecting our economy, affecting our security. Mexico is working with us to stop those who cross our southern border illegally. Mexico is our third largest trading partner. One million American citizens live in Mexico. It is our top tourist destination, with mil-lions of U.S. visitors every year. My State shares a border with our neigh-bor to the south. We also share a cul-tural heritage. The trade that grows every year—hundreds of millions of dollars in goods and services—move be-tween our Nations. Over 36,000 jobs in my State depend on United States- Mexico trade. This increased trade is an engine of economic growth. Exports from New Mexico to Mexico have soared from over $70 million a year to now $1.5 billion 15 years later. \nIn New Mexico we know how impor-\ntant this partnership is. We need a strong ambassador in Mexico City— working on trade, on border security, and on cultural ties between our Na-tions. We need an ambassador to work with Mexico and other Central Amer-ican countries to address immigration issues, to help resolve the migrant cri-sis, to crack down on border violence and drug trafficking. This is clear to both sides of the aisle, especially to those of us from border States. As someone who has worked with Roberta on multiple issues, I know she is the right person for this job. \nI especially want to thank my Repub-\nlican colleague, Senator J\nEFF FLAKE , \nfor his efforts. He is concerned, as I am, that this cannot wait. As Senator F\nLAKE said recently: \nIt’s crunch time now. Once you get into \nnext year, it’s easier to just put them on hold until the next president assumes office in 2017. \nI hope that will not happen. I hope \nwe will listen to Senator F LAKE be-cause it is crunch time and because we \ndo need to get this done. \nWhat is holding up her nomination? \nIt isn’t her qualifications. It isn’t con-cerns about how she would be able to carry out her duties as Ambassador. The problem is rooted in something else—something that should have no bearing on whether she is confirmed: Presidential politics and policy dif-ferences with the administration over her work on Cuba. \nThis year, the world celebrated the \nreopening of diplomatic relations be-tween the United States and Cuba. As the Assistant Secretary for the West-ern Hemisphere, Roberta helped nego-tiate this shift. We have begun a 21st century relationship with Cuba—one I am convinced will bring freedom and openness. I congratulate the President for leading this historic change. \nA few Senators disagree with his \nCuba policy, and so they are blocking Roberta Jacobson’s confirmation to serve as Ambassador to Mexico. \nUnfortunately, this is just one exam-\nple of how the rules are being twisted and misused. She is one of the many qualified nominees whose confirma-tions are on hold. Many of them wait because one or two Senators want to make a political point or extract polit-ical pain. Not happy with the Presi-dent? Block his nominee. Not OK with a policy? Keep the seat vacant. \nThe real aim is the administration. \nNo matter how qualified, the nominee is just an easy target. \nMeanwhile, the backlog grows: 19 \njudges, half a dozen ambassadors, even a top official at the Treasury Depart-ment whose job is to go after the fi-nances of terrorists. That position is vacant as well. \nWe are on track for the lowest num-\nber of confirmations in three decades. We now have 30 judicial districts with emergency levels of backlogs. At the beginning of the year, we had 12. Thou-sands of people are waiting for their day in court because there is no judge to hear the case. Important work for the American people is left undone. \nWhen we fail to do our job, when we \nfail to give these nominees a vote up or down, our government fails too. \nThis is not just the President’s team. \nIt is our team. It is America’s team— working on trade and security, moving our economy forward, seeing that jus-tice is done. \nThese vital posts should not go un-\nfilled. \nI urge my colleagues to allow us to \nmove these nominations forward now. \nI do not believe the Constitution \ngives me the right to block a qualified nominee, no matter who is in the White House. I say that today, and I have said it many times before. \nA Republican President may have \nnominees I disagree with. That is most likely so. But the people elect a Presi-dent. They give him or her the right to select a team to govern. \nToday—right now—the majority \nleader can call a vote to confirm these nominees, yet he chooses not to. We \nchanged the Senate rules to allow a majority vote, but that does no good if they remain blocked. That is what is happening in this Congress. The line gets longer and longer of perfectly qualified nominees who are denied a vote and are unable to serve. \nSo I am not sure who wins here, but \nI know who loses. The losers are the American people. The losers are the men and women who cannot get a day in court, because there is no judge to hear their case. \nThe losers are American citizens, \nbusinesses, and workers who rely on our embassies and other public serv-ants. The room is empty, and the work is not done—all because one Senator says no, and the majority leader says OK. \nNominees should be judged on their \nmerits, not on feelings about a Presi-dent someone may not like or a policy someone may not approve. They are public servants in the executive branch, on our courts. They serve the people of this country. \nToo often now that service goes beg-\nging because one Senator wants to make a point and will gum up the works to do it. That is not governing; it is a temper tantrum. \nSo I say to my colleagues: Let’s get \nserious. Let’s stop these games. Give nominees the consideration they de-serve. Give the American people a gov-ernment that works. \nMr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe legislative clerk proceeded to \ncall the roll. \nMr. UDALL. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nRECESS \nMr. UDALL. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m. \nThere being no objection, the Senate, \nat 12:19 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mr. P\nORTMAN ). \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from Wyoming. \nf \nSENATE ACCOMPLISHMENTS \nMr. ENZI. Mr. President, last year we \nmade a promise to the American peo-ple. If we were elected to the majority, we would get Washington working again for American families. Repub-licans in the Senate have been focused on putting our country on not just an-other course but a better course. This will allow us to begin rebuilding the trust of hard-working taxpayers who have seen their government become less effective and less accountable. \nOver the course of this year, as the \nSenate got back to work, the American \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.017 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8658 December 15, 2015 \npeople got to see something that had \nbeen missing from this side of the Cap-itol over the past 8 years; that is, an open and transparent legislative proc-ess. This included Members from both sides of the aisle offering, debating, and ultimately voting on amendments to not just our balanced budget resolu-tion and reconciliation proposal but to a whole host of legislative measures. Leader M\nCCONNELL promised this, it is \nhappening, and bills are passing be-cause people on both sides of the aisle are having an opportunity to represent their constituents, to get votes on amendments. \nThe previous year we had 15 total \nvotes on amendments. This year we have already had 192 votes on amend-ments, and the year is not over. So in-stead of allowing political points and partisan gridlock to take precedence over responsible governing, we are once again doing the people’s business, and the Senate Budget Committee played an important role. \nWe had the first balanced budget in \n14 years. Yes, Congress this year ap-proved its first balanced 10-year budget since 2001. Americans who work every day to provide for their families and pay their taxes understand that it is time for the Federal Government to live within its means, just as they do. Hard-working taxpayers know they can’t live on borrowed money, and nei-ther can our Federal Government. This balanced budget approved by Congress shows these families that if they can do it, so can we. Our goal is to make our government more efficient, effec-tive, and accountable. If government programs are not delivering results, they should be improved, and if they are not needed they should be elimi-nated. \nA balanced budget would also help \nAmerica tame its exploding debt, which today totals almost $19 trillion. Every dollar spent on interest on our debt is another dollar we won’t be able to use for government services, for in-dividuals in need or another dollar that won’t be available for taxpayers for their own needs. Washington must live within its means, just as every hard- working family does every day, and we have to deliver a more effective and ac-countable government to the American people that supports them when it must and gets out of the way when it should. \nTo get our country and economy \nback on track, Americans must be al-lowed to spend more time working to grow their businesses or to advance in their jobs instead of worrying about taxes and inefficient and ineffective regulations. We want to empower our job creators to find new opportunities to expand our economy and, most im-portantly, assure that each and every American has the opportunity to find a good-paying job and a fulfilling career. \nThis is why the balanced budget also \nprovided for repeal of the President’s unprecedented expansion of govern-ment intrusion into health care deci-sions for hard-working families and \nsmall businesses. Our goal is to lift the burdens and higher costs ObamaCare has placed on all Americans. \nObamaCare is saddling American \nhouseholds with more than $1 trillion in new taxes over the next 10 years, and according to the Congressional Budget Office, ObamaCare will cost taxpayers more than $116 billion a year. For every American, ObamaCare has meant more government, more bureaucracy, and more rules and regulations, along with soaring health costs and less ac-cess to care. \nThe budget reconciliation legislation \npassed by the Senate will eliminate more than $1 trillion in tax increases placed on the American people, while saving more than $400 billion in spend-ing. Most importantly, this bill begins to build a bridge from the President’s broken promises to a better health care system for hard-working families across the country. \nThe Senate Budget Committee is an \nimportant resource for facts and infor-mation about the congressional budget process and the economy. That is why my committee recently began pub-lishing its budget bulletin again, to provide regular expert articles by com-mittee analysts on the issues before Congress relating to the budget, defi-cits, debt, and the economy. This year the bulletin has addressed the highway trust fund debate; defense spending, BCA caps, and OCO special funding; reconciliation and the Byrd Rule; budg-et enforcement and points of order; the appropriations process, which is the spending bills; the debt limit debate; and the 2016 continuing resolution. \nAnother important part of the com-\nmittee’s work is to increase oversight and transparency surrounding congres-sional spending. This is why I directed the Congressional Budget Office to re-lease regular reports tracking the budgetary impact of enacted legisla-tion against the fiscal year 2016 bal-anced budget resolution the Republican Congress approved. I have provided these reports after each recess work pe-riod in order to provide a status update on Congress’s progress achieving the budget resolution plan. \nRegularly providing information \nsuch as this will help foster fiscal transparency in the Federal spending process, and over time it will encour-age a heightened awareness in the im-portance of complying with the budget. It will also help ensure that Congress remains focused on fiscal responsi-bility. \nThe recent omnibus spending and \ndebt deal clearly illustrates that the Federal budget process is in serious need of reform, which is why the Sen-ate Budget Committee this year has also focused on fixing our broken budg-et process. \nInstilling the Federal budget process \nwith regular action and predictability, active legislative oversight and spend-ing transparency are critical to strengthening our democracy and re-ducing our Nation’s unsustainable \nspending and debt. \nWe often talk about the threat Amer-\nica’s growing debt poses to our econ-omy and our future, but the growth in Federal regulations also poses a threat to long-term economic growth and job creation. The committee this year has been working to shine a light on these regulations and the burden they have on each and every American. It is crit-ical for lawmakers and hard-working Americans to understand the true cost of regulations that are being issued by the administration. Taming our ‘‘regu-lation nation’’ will help ensure that the Federal Government works for the people, instead of people working for the government. \nThese aren’t the only things that the \nSenate accomplished. I was proud to be a part of the Finance Committee’s ef-forts to replace the doc fix so that doc-tors could be paid properly and Medi-care recipients would be able to see doctors, also to enact trade promotion authority legislation, to increase trade that increases dollars to the United States, and also to finance the highway trust fund. I was proud to be a part of the effort of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee to re-authorize the Elementary and Sec-ondary Education Act, and I commend my chairman for his work on those bills. \nToday I also want to acknowledge \nSenator C\nOCHRAN ’s work to lead the \nAppropriations Committee in reporting all 12 appropriations bills for the first time since 2012. Incidentally, they stayed within the budget on those, and most were bipartisan. It is the first time all 12 appropriations bills have been voted out of committee since 2012. I want to thank Senator M\nURKOWSKI \nfor her work on energy issues, includ-ing the Keystone Pipeline bill, and Senator C\nORNYN , for his efforts to pro-\ntect victims of trafficking. \nI was also proud to work this year on \nsome issues important to my own State of Wyoming by pushing back on the administration’s Clean Power Plan and waters of the United States rule, primarily designed to eliminate the use of coal and drive up the price of elec-tricity in this country, which in es-sence will cost the average American a lot more for their electricity. Just as importantly, it will send jobs overseas where the energy costs less. \nThis year Congress also corrected a \nproblem that the 2012 highway bill cre-ated for Wyoming, and I commend Sen-ator B\nARRASSO for his efforts on that. I \nalso want to thank Senators M CCAIN \nand I SAKSON for their work to support \nour troops and our veterans. I appre-ciate Senator M\nCCAINworking with me \nto ensure small businesses have the help they need to compete for Federal contracts. \nThis isn’t an exhaustive list. There \nare several more things. We passed over 80 bills this year. But these are some of the things we can be proud of. The Senate is under new management, \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.019 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8659 December 15, 2015 \nand these accomplishments and others \nstill to come show hard-working tax-payers that Republicans in the Senate are working to deliver a more effective and accountable government, a govern-ment for the people and by the people that supports them when it must and gets out of the way when it should. We have made great progress this year, but there is still more to be done. By work-ing together, we are proving that we can deliver real solutions and real progress that the American people want and deserve. \nI yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from Massachusetts. \nf \nTAX BREAK PARITY \nMr. MARKEY. Mr. President, here is \nwhere we are. The Republicans are holding the government spending bill and tax breaks for businesses hostage unless they can attach a rider to these bills to allow Big Oil to export Amer-ican oil overseas to the highest foreign bidder. Ten days before Christmas, Re-publicans want to give Big Oil the big-gest of all Christmas presents by lift-ing the crude oil export ban, and they keep saying no to long-term extensions of the wind and solar tax breaks and protections for consumers as part of the deal. Lifting the oil export ban would be a disaster for our economy, our climate, and for our national secu-rity. We should have tax break parity. \nLet me tell you where we are right \nnow. In America the oil industry gets approximately $7 to $8 billion a year in tax breaks. It is interesting because $7 to $8 billion is what the wind and solar industry receives each year—pretty even: wind and solar; oil—$7 to $8 bil-lion every year in tax breaks. \nWe keep hearing from the other side: \nLet’s have a level playing field; let’s have all of the above. Well, what are they asking for right now? \nHere is what they are asking for. The \noil tax breaks will continue forever, and the wind and solar tax breaks will phase out over the next 3 to 5 years. This is on top of the windfall which the oil industry receives from the expor-tation of the oil that otherwise would stay here in the United States. Under that scenario, the losers are going to be U.S. consumers because we will be exporting the oil that is already here in our own ground, so that the oil in-dustry can get a higher price overseas. It will hurt our national security be-cause we still import 5 million barrels per day. Can I say that again? We still import 5 million barrels of oil a day. We still import 25 percent of all our oil. Some of the countries we import that oil from you may have heard of—Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Algeria, Nigeria. We are still importing oil, and we are still exporting men and women over to the Middle East to protect those cargo ships of oil, bringing it to the United States. We don’t have a surplus of oil in the United States. We have a deficit of 5 million barrels of oil per day. So that is a dangerous policy. On top of \nthat, I will just say that the whole eth-anol subsidy program in the United States is premised upon the fact that we do not have energy independence and we need ethanol to get $1.3 billion dollars’ worth of tax breaks a year— biodiesel. \nWell, that whole program starts to \nget called into question if we are al-ready going to declare energy inde-pendence here, even as we still import 5 million barrels a day. Our domestic refiners will be hurt by this unless there are proper protections built in in the Tax Code for those refiners. Other-wise, as that crude oil goes overseas, it is going to call into jeopardy the via-bility of the oil refineries across the East Coast, Midwest, and West Coast of the United States of America. \nOn the environment, if Brookings In-\nstitution is correct and upwards of 3 million barrels of oil will be exported by the year 2025, that is the equivalent of 150 coal-burning plants of additional pollution going up from our own soil. \nSome people question: Well, will that \nreally happen? Let me give you some other numbers. The Energy Informa-tion Administration says that the de-veloping world and its expanding econ-omy are going to require 10 million ad-ditional barrels of oil by the year 2025. The expanding economy is going to re-quire 20 million barrels of new oil by the year 2035. \nWhat Big Oil in America wants is a \npiece of that action. They want to be able to export into that market, and they will do so by drilling on American soil, not to reduce our own dependence upon imported oil but to sell it because the price on the global market is high-er—much higher than the price they could get in America. \nIs that truly a good policy, given \nwhat we are seeing about the stability of the Saudi government? Well, just look at the governments all across the Middle East from which we import oil. Is this really a good idea? I don’t think so. I think it goes to the heart of our national security. \nWhat happens to the Big Oil industry \nover the next 20 years is that they pick up about $500 billion in new tax reve-nues; that is with a ‘‘b,’’ $500 billion. They keep their $7 billion in tax breaks every year over a 20-year period. That is $140 billion more. \nMeanwhile, the solar and wind tax \nbreaks expire; they run out. The ru-mors are they run out over the wind in 3 years. Well, the young generation is the green generation. They think wind and solar are the future. They don’t think fossil fuels are the future. \nThe whole world, 195 countries, just \ngathered and signed an agreement to move away from a fossil era to a low- carbon, clean-energy future. So if there was going to be a deal out here, then there should be some equality. If you don’t take away the tax breaks from oil and gas, then don’t take away the tax breaks for wind and solar—a level playing field, all of the above. Have a competition so that we can know at \nthe end of the day—which is what I think is going to happen—that renew-ables are actually the future. It is a tale of two tax breaks: one for Big Oil and one for the renewable industry. \nAs I stand on the floor, this is still an \nunanswered question, but I do know this: The Republicans are pledging that if their Presidential candidate wins in 2016, then in 2017 that Presidential can-didate is going to take off the books the clean power rules that President Obama has promulgated. They are going to review the fuel economy standards that push us to 54.5 miles per gallon by the year 2025, which is still the largest single reduction of green-house gases in one stroke that any \ncountry in the world has ever actually announced. They are also saying, obvi-ously this week, that they are going to allow the wind and solar tax breaks to expire. So just as the world meets, we have the announcements about what their goals are on this issue. \nI think the world expects more from \nus, but I actually think the young peo-ple of our country expect more from us. They truly think this is the future; this is the revolution: more efficient vehicles, powerplants that have fewer emissions, tax breaks for wind, and solar for fuel cells—the future. It is not having 150 new powerplants of coal equivalents of oil being drilled for in our country without some cor-responding, permanent, long-term tax breaks that would offset it. No, it is just the opposite. They are saying: We are coming after the Presidential elec-tion for the reductions in greenhouse gases from powerplants. We will take those rules off the books. We are going to review the fuel economy standards. We will take those off the books, and we will make sure there is never again a permanent tax break for wind and solar. That is where we are in the same week that the world just met in Paris to announce the global solution to a global warming problem. \nSo I say equality; I say keep it the \nsame. If you want to keep oil, if you want to keep natural gas tax breaks, keep them. But don’t take away ours; that is, not mine but those who believe in a low-carbon, clean-energy future for our planet. The United States must be the leader. We are the innovation giant. We are the country that the world is looking for in order to find these solutions. \nWe passed laws that created this cell \nphone in 1996. Until then it was the size of a brick, and people didn’t have one in their pocket. Then, 8 years later, a new cell phone came along. By the way, 600 million people in Africa have them because we innovated; we went first. \nWe can do the same thing in the en-\nergy sector, but there has to be some fair treatment that is put in place, es-pecially when the oil industry receives such an incredible bonanza of those breaks here—$500 billion in new reve-nues. From my perspective, it is under-mining our national security because \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.020 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8660 December 15, 2015 \nwe shouldn’t be exporting oil when we \nare still importing it from dangerous places on the planet, and they keep all their tax breaks. \nFrom my perspective, I look at the \nRepublican mantra from 6 to 7 years ago. It was ‘‘Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less.’’ They were saying: The more we drill here, the more energy independ-ence we are going to have. They are re-placing it this week with ‘‘drill here, export there, pay more’’ here at home. That is their new slogan. Everything they had said about why we should be drilling here is now made obsolete by their commitment to now ensure that oil gets exported. There are two prices: There is an OPEC price for global oil, and there is a Texas price for American oil. It is always cheaper here. They want to get it off into ships to get the OPEC price on the global market. I un-derstand that. \nWhat I don’t understand is how we \ncan leave behind—with tax breaks that are phasing out and the rumors that the wind tax break expires over the next 3 years—those new technologies that are branded ‘‘Made in America,’’ such as these cell phone technologies, these smartphone technologies that have revolutionized countries and con-tinents all across the planet. \nI come to the floor to say I under-\nstand why Big Oil wants this. It is about as great a Christmas gift as any industry would ever have received. \nIn return, I hope before we adjourn \nthat we can find a way of being more generous—much more generous—to those other companies, those other technologies that are the future. I hope the promises Republican Presidential candidates are making that they are going to come back and take the clean powerplant rules off the books—that they are protected because we have the tax breaks. It still signals to industries that they are our future and the past is just a memory, that there is a new 21st century vision that America is going to lead, that the promises President Obama made in Paris on behalf of the American people are, in fact, going to be met, and that our policies are going to reflect the words the President spoke. \nI thank the Presiding Officer for this \ntime. \nI yield back the remainder of my \ntime. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from South Dakota. \nf \nSENATE ACCOMPLISHMENTS \nMr. THUNE. Mr. President, from vot-\ning to repeal ObamaCare to passing the first long-term Transportation bill in a decade and the first joint balanced budget in 14 years, Senate Republicans have worked hard this year to fulfill our promise to get Washington work-ing again for American families. \nWhile some of our efforts have been \nblocked by Senate Democrats or by the President, we have still managed to get a lot done. I am particularly proud of some of the legislation we passed this \nyear that will benefit South Dakota families and businesses as well as fami-lies and businesses across the country. One bill that I have been working on for a long time—a bill that will mean a lot to South Dakota’s farmers and ranchers—is the legislation the House passed last week, the Surface Trans-portation Board reauthorization bill. \nThe Surface Transportation Board is \nresponsible for helping to ensure the ef-ficiency of our rail system by address-ing problems and adjudicating disputes between railroads and shippers. Unfor-tunately, it has been clear for several years now that the Surface Transpor-tation Board needs to work better. This became particularly apparent in 2013 and 2014 when a sharp increase in shipping demand and harsh winter weather conditions combined to create massive backlogs in the availability of railcars for grain shipping which, in turn, caused storage issues for farmers across the Midwest. \nThe U.S. Department of Agriculture \nfound that the rail backlog lowered the price of corn, wheat, and soybeans in the upper Midwest. It forced shippers to pay record-high railroad-car pre-miums—in the neighborhood of 28 per-cent to 150 percent above the previous average levels—for roughly 65 consecu-tive weeks. \nThe Surface Transportation Board \nlegislation that Congress sent to the President last week will help prevent another situation such as this in the future. The bill, which I spearheaded, makes a number of significant reforms to the Board. For starters, it estab-lishes the number of Board members and establishes a more collaborative process that will allow members to work together to identify and solve problems as they emerge. The bill also provides the Board with the investiga-tive authority to address rail service issues even if an official complaint has not been made. This will allow and en-courage the Board to be more proactive when it comes to addressing problems in our Nation’s rail system. \nThe bill also increases transparency \nby requiring the Surface Transpor-tation Board to establish a data base of complaints and to provide quarterly re-ports with key information to facili-tate the effective monitoring of service issues. Finally, the bill improves the current process for resolving disputes between railroads and shippers. \nRight now, disputes can take mul-\ntiple years and literally millions of dollars to resolve, putting a tremen-dous burden on shippers and on rail-roads as well. The legislation we devel-oped improves this process by setting timelines for rate reviews, expanding voluntary arbitrary procedures, and re-quiring the Surface Transportation Board to study alternative rate review methodologies to streamline and to ex-pedite cases. It requires the Surface Transportation Board to maintain at least one simplified, expedited rate re-view methodology. These changes will increase efficiency throughout the rate \nreview process. \nSouth Dakota farmers and ranchers \ndepend on our Nation’s railroads to bring their goods to market. They also depend on our Nation’s highways. This year I was proud to work with my col-leagues in the Senate on the first long- term Transportation bill in a decade. \nOver the past several years, Congress \nmade a habit of passing numerous short-term funding extensions for Fed-eral transportation programs. Over the past several years of short-term exten-sions, the latest, I think, was No. 38. That was an incredibly inefficient way \nto manage our Nation’s infrastructure needs, and it wasted an incredible amount of money. It also put a lot of transportation jobs in jeopardy. \nWhen Congress fails to make clear \nhow transportation funding will be al-located, States and local governments are left without the certainty they need to authorize projects or to make long-term plans for addressing various transportation infrastructure needs. That means essential projects, con-struction projects, get deferred. Nec-essary repairs may not get made, and the jobs that depend on these projects and repairs are put at risk. \nThe Transportation bill we passed \nthis month changes all that. It reau-thorizes transportation programs for the long term, and it provides 5 years of guaranteed funding. It means States and local governments will have the certainty they need to invest in big transportation projects and the jobs that they create. That, in turn, means \na stronger economy and a more reli-able, safer, and effective transportation system. \nAs chairman of the commerce com-\nmittee, I spend a lot of time working with committee members on both sides of the aisle to develop the Transpor-tation bill’s safety provisions. Our por-tion of the bill includes a host of im-portant safety improvements, includ-ing enhancements to the notification process to ensure that consumers are informed of auto-related recalls, and also important reforms at the govern-ment agency responsible for overseeing safety in our Nation’s cars and trucks. \nAnother important success for South \nDakota this year was the final ap-proval of the expansion of the Powder River Training Complex—the military training airspace over South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming. The expanded airspace approved by the Air Force and the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration will allow our air men and women to carry out critical train-ing in conditions that more closely re-semble combat missions. After working with the Air Force on this project for nearly 9 years, I was proud to see this expansion finally completed and even more delighted to see the first large- force training exercise take place at the expanded Powder River Training Complex just this month. Forty-one aircraft took part in the exercise, in-cluding the B–1 bombers from Ells-worth Air Force Base in South Dakota. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.022 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8661 December 15, 2015 \nThe expanded training complex will \nsave Ellsworth $23 million per year in training costs by reducing the need for the B–1 bombers to commute to other places, such as Nevada and Utah, for training. \nSupporting our men and women in \nuniform—like our airmen at Ells-worth—is one of the most important jobs we have as Members of Congress. \nThis year I am proud to report that \nthe Senate passed a national defense authorization bill that incorporates a number of critical reforms that will ex-pand the resources available to our \nservicemembers and strengthen our na-tional security. The National Defense Authorization Act for 2016 tackles waste and inefficiency at the Depart-ment of Defense and focuses funding on our warfighters rather than on the Pentagon bureaucracy. \nThe bill also overhauls our military \nretirement system. Before this bill, the system limited retirement benefits to servicemembers who had served for 20 years or more, which means huge num-bers of military personnel, including many veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, retired after years of service without having accrued any re-tirement benefits. The National De-fense Authorization Act replaces this system with a new retirement system that will ensure that the majority of our Nation’s servicemembers receive retirement benefits for their years of service to our country even if they have not reached the 20-year mark. \nThe bills I have discussed today are \njust a few of the accomplishments of the Republican-led Senate. Over the course of this year, we have passed a number of significant pieces of legisla-tion that will benefit Americans for years to come. \nWe have worked hard to help our Na-\ntion’s veterans by expanding access to mental health resources, reducing wait times for medical care, and increasing the number of providers who can serve veterans. We voted to repeal ObamaCare and start the process of moving toward the real health care re-form Americans are looking for: an af-fordable, accountable, patient-focused system that puts individuals in control of their health care decisions. We passed legislation to contain the out- of-control bureaucracy at the EPA and legislation to begin the process of safe-guarding Medicare and Social Security by putting them on a more sustainable financial footing going forward. We passed cyber security legislation to protect Americans’ privacy and a major education reform bill that puts States, parents, teachers, and local school boards—not Washington bureau-crats—in charge of our children’s edu-cation. \nWhile we may have accomplished a \nlot this year, we know there is still a lot more that needs to be done. Ameri-cans are still suffering in the Obama economy, and our Nation continues to face terrorist threats at home and abroad. Whether it is enacting pro-economic \ngrowth policies at home or ensuring that our military has the resources it needs to protect us from threats abroad, Republicans will redouble our efforts to make sure Washington is meeting the needs of American fami-lies and addressing the American peo-ple’s priorities. We plan to spend the second year of the 114th Congress next year the way we have spent the first: fighting to make our economy strong-er, our government more efficient and more accountable, and our Nation and our world safer and more secure. \nMr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe senior assistant legislative clerk \nproceeded to call the roll. \nMr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nMr. WHITEHOUSE. I ask unanimous \nconsent to speak for up to 20 minutes. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nCLIMATE CHANGE \nMr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, \none of the brightest bright spots at the Paris climate talks last week was the robust corporate presence. Leading businesses and executives from around the world were there in Paris to voice their support for a strong international climate agreement. That brings me here today for the now 122nd time to say that it is time for America’s lead-ing corporations and their lobbyists to bring that same message here to Wash-ington to help Congress wake up. \nLet me use an example of two of the \ngood guys. The two biggest drinks com-panies in America are Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. Coke and Pepsi both signed this public letter urging strong climate action in Paris: \nDear U.S. and global leaders: \nNow is the time to meaningfully address \nthe reality of climate change. We are asking you to embrace the opportunity presented to you in Paris. . . . We are ready to meet the climate challenges that face our businesses. Please join us in meeting the climate chal-lenges that face the world. \nAnd it is not just that public letter; \nCoca-Cola’s Web site says it will reduce CO\n2emissions by 25 percent and that to \ndo so, ‘‘Coca-Cola will work to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions across its value chain, making comprehensive carbon footprint reductions across its manufacturing processes, packaging formats, delivery fleet, refrigeration equipment and ingredient sourcing.’’ \nCoca-Cola also says: ‘‘We continue to \npartner with peer companies, bottling partners, NGOs, governments and oth-ers in addressing our greenhouse gas emissions and encouraging progress in response to climate change.’’ \nPepsi’s Web site heralds what it calls \n‘‘its commitment to action on climate change’’ and announces that it has \nsigned both the Ceres BICEP Climate Declaration in the United States and the Prince of Wales’s Corporate Lead-ers Group Trillion Tonne Communique in the UK. These commitments, they say, ‘‘are part of PepsiCo’s overall strategy to address climate change by working across its business and with global leaders.’’ \nHere is Indra Nooyi, chairman and \nCEO of PepsiCo: \nCombating climate change is absolutely \ncritical to the future of our company, cus-tomers, consumers—and our world. I believe all of us need to take action now. \nI have corresponded with these com-\npanies about climate change, and here is what they have said in their letters to me. \nIn March 2013, Coke said: \nWe recognize that climate change is a crit-\nical challenge facing our planet, with poten-tial impacts on biodiversity, water re-sources, public health, and agriculture. Be-yond the effects on the communities we serve, we view climate change as a potential business risk, understanding that it could likely have direct and indirect effects on our business. \nAs a responsible global company, with op-\nerations in more than 200 countries, we have a role to play in climate protection. . . . \nThen in May 2014: \nThe Coca-Cola Company has strongly stat-\ned that climate change is happening and the implications of climate change for our plan-et are profound and wide-ranging. It is our belief that climate change may have long- term direct and indirect implications for our business and supply chain and we recognize that sustainability is core to our long-term value. . . . Climate protection is a key com-ponent of our business strategy. \nIn August of this year: \nCoca-Cola joined twelve other corporations \nat the White House pledging our support for the American Business Act on Climate [Pledge]. Climate protection has been a key focus of Coca-Cola for decades. \nIn a letter of February 2013, Pepsi \nsaid: \nPepsiCo applauds your efforts to address \nclimate change by focusing Congressional at-tention on the issue. . . . At PepsiCo, we rec-ognize the adverse impacts that greenhouse gas emissions have on global temperatures, weather patterns, and the frequency and se-verity of extreme weather and natural disas-ters. These impacts may have significant im-plications for our company. . . . Accord-ingly, responding to climate change is inte-grated into PepsiCo’s business strategy. \nIn September of this year, Pepsi \nwrote: \nWe look forward to providing further sup-\nport on the ‘‘Road to Paris’’—demonstrating that actions by business in climate are not only good for the environment, but good for business. \nThat is all great stuff. Here is where \nit gets a little strange. Coke and Pepsi have a trade association, the American Beverage Association, that lobbies for the soft drink industry, and they also support the business lobbying group, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In-deed, the American Beverage Associa-tion sits on the board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and contributes to it a lot of money. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.024 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8662 December 15, 2015 \nHere is the official position of the \nAmerican Beverage Association on cli-mate change from its Web site: \nEach of America’s beverage companies has \nset goals to lower our emissions over time while continually improving efficiency. And our companies have pledged to work with government leaders, environmental organi-zations, and other businesses to ensure these emission reductions are happening through-out the United States. \nThey even have the Beverage Indus-\ntry Environmental Roundtable. But do they lobby us about this in Congress? I have never seen any sign of it. When the American Beverage Association thought Congress might impose a soda tax to fund health care, then they lob-bied like crazy—nearly $30 million worth of lobbying expenditure. They know how to lobby when they want to. But on climate, I have never seen it. \nAs for the U.S. Chamber of Com-\nmerce, everyone in Congress knows that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is dead set against Congress doing any-thing serious about climate change. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a very powerful lobby group, and its power in Congress is fully dedicated to stopping any serious climate legisla-tion. They are implacable adversaries of climate action, and we see their hos-tility everywhere. \nAt one point, the U.S. Chamber of \nCommerce wrote to me to say I mischaracterized its position on cli-mate change. ‘‘Even a cursory review of our stated views on climate change,’’ wrote Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Tom Donahue, ‘‘shows that the Chamber is not debating the exist-ence of climate change or that human activity plays a role.’’ \nWell and good, but here is what I \nwrote back. \nMr. President, I ask unanimous con-\nsent to have printed in the R\nECORD my \nfull letter at the end of my remarks. \nI wrote back: \nI am in politics in Washington, and I see \nthe behavior of your organization firsthand. There is no way to reconcile what I see in real life around me with the assurances in your letter that you treat the climate prob-lem in any way seriously. \nI then offered a list of the many ways \nthe U.S. Chamber of Commerce ac-tively opposes climate legislation and concluded: \nIn every practical way in which your orga-\nnization brings pressure to bear on the American political process, I see you bring-ing it to bear in line with the big carbon pol-luters and the climate denial industry. And given the powerful and relentless way in which you bring that pressure to bear on our system in the service of your own First Amendment rights, I hope you will accept that I have the right to express my own views under that same First Amendment. \nIn sum, the U.S. Chamber of Com-\nmerce has a terrible record on climate change. It is Coke and Pepsi’s adver-sary on getting anything done. So why is Coke and Pepsi’s American Beverage Association on the board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce? \nThe result is that Coke and Pepsi \ntake one position on climate change in their public materials and in Paris and \nthroughout their internal corporate ef-fort, but here in Congress, where the rubber meets the road on legislating and where the lobbying meets our leg-islative efforts, their lobbying agencies don’t support their position. I actually wonder how well they know in the ex-ecutive suites of Coke and Pepsi that their position is not supported by the lobbying effort they support. \nLet me be clear. I am not here to ask \nthat companies such as Coke and Pepsi take a different position on climate change than what they believe. I am here to ask companies to line up their advocacy in Congress with what they believe. My ask is simple: Match your advocacy in Congress with your policy. Don’t outsource your advocacy to enti-ties that take the opposite position from you—not on an issue of this mag-nitude. This is too important an issue for great American companies to say one thing when they are talking to the public and have their lobbying agencies say something completely different when they come to Congress. \nI have asked Coke and Pepsi about \nthis discrepancy between their policy and these organizations’ advocacy, and here is what they say. From Pepsi: \nThe Chamber is an important partner for \nPepsiCo on critical tax and trade matters. However, our positions on climate change have diverged. \nFrom Coke: \nThe Coca-Cola Company belongs to a wide \nrange of organizations through which we gain different perspectives on global and na-tional issues; however these groups do not speak on our behalf. \nWell, if their positions have diverged \nand these organizations don’t speak for them on this issue, why keep sup-porting one of the leading political op-ponents of meaningful climate action? If you insist on supporting the entities that lobby against you on climate change, then the question becomes this: What are you doing in Congress to lobby back? What are your counter-measures to dispel the voice of these agencies that you are supporting? \nClimate change is not just any other \nissue. It is so big an issue that the world’s leaders just gathered in Paris to address it in the largest gathering of world leaders in history. It is so big an issue that it has its own page on Coke’s and Pepsi’s Web sites and, indeed, on the Web sites of most major American corporations. It is so big an issue that our former Pacific commander, Admi-ral Locklear, said it was the biggest national security threat we face in the Pacific theater. To use Admiral Locklear’s exact words, climate change ‘‘is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen . . . that will cripple the security environment, probably more likely than the other scenarios we all often talk about.’’ \nAround here in Congress, the bul-\nlying menace of the fossil fuel industry is everywhere. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is their vocal advocate. If companies such as Coke and Pepsi don’t push back against this group that \nthey fund, that choice has real con-sequences here. That choice says to Congress: ‘‘This issue isn’t really seri-ous to us.’’ That choice says to the in-dividual Members over here: ‘‘If you cross the fossil fuel boys, don’t count on us to have your back.’’ \nI recently received a letter from \nExxonMobil. It says: \nExxonMobil has for a number of years held \nthe view that a ‘‘revenue-neutral carbon tax’’ is the best option. . . . [A] carbon tax could help create the conditions to reduce greenhouse emissions in a way that spurs new efficiencies and new technologies. \nThis is ExxonMobil. \nThe revenue-neutral carbon tax could be a \nworkable policy framework for countries around the world—and the policy most likely to preserve the ability of every sector of so-ciety to seek out new efficiencies and new technologies. \nExxonMobil may say that in their \nletter, but let me say as the author of the Senate’s revenue-neutral carbon- fee bill, I can assure you that bill is getting zero support from ExxonMobil. ExxonMobil is playing a double game, with statements such as they made in the letter to me on the one hand, but on the other hand all of its massive \nlobbying clout directed against doing anything serious on climate. \nI suggest that it is the same with the \nother companies. They may have enough happy talk about climate change being serious to get them through a cocktail party at Davos, but the full weight of their industry lob-bying leverage, through the Chamber and the American Petroleum Institute and a slew of other front groups, is leaned in hard against climate legisla-tion, including revenue-neutral carbon fees. We should perhaps expect better of them. But we should certainly ex-pect better of other companies that don’t have ExxonMobil’s massive con-flict of interest. \nTo be fair to Coke and Pepsi, they \nare not alone. Congress is heavily in-fluenced by corporations. That is no news flash. What my colleagues here all know is that virtually zero of that corporate influence is brought to bear in support of climate action. Even com-panies with good internal climate poli-cies, even companies that are leaders in what they are doing within their companies and within their supply chains on climate change shy away from this issue in Congress. \nThe result is that, on one side, the \nfossil fuel industry maintains a des-perate grip on Congress to stop any cli-mate action. They lean on Congress hard to get their way. On the other side, the rest of corporate America has virtually nothing to say in Congress on climate change. Maybe they do on their Web sites, maybe in their public relations, certainly through their sus-tainability departments, and in some cases from their CEOs. But from their lobbyists and from the trade associa-tions and the lobbying organizations that represent them here in Congress, the silence is deafening. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.026 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8663 December 15, 2015 \nThe corporate effort in Congress to \nget something done on climate change rounds to zero. I am in Congress, and I am here to say we need you guys to show up. I get that it is never conven-ient to stand up to bullies. It is always easier if they just go away, but the fos-sil fuel bullies are not going away. So it is either stand up to them or keep letting them roll Congress. \nIf what Coke and Pepsi and other cor-\nporations say publicly are the things they really believe, then it should be important to them that Congress not get rolled by the guys who are working against what they believe. This should not be too big an ask for the corpora-tions that stood up in Paris: Do the same thing in Congress. Do the same thing in Congress. Do the simplest and truest of things: Stand up for what you believe. \nIt is time to wake up, but it is also \ntime to stand up, and what a difference you will make. \nMr. President, I yield the floor. There being no objection, the mate-\nrial was ordered to be printed in the R\nECORD , as follows: \nEXXON MOBIL CORPORATION , \nWashington, DC, December 2, 2015. \nHon. E DWARD J. M ARKEY , \nU.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Hon. R\nICHARD BLUMENTHAL , \nU.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Hon. S\nHELDON WHITEHOUSE , \nU.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Hon. E\nLIZABETH WARREN , \nU.S. Senate, Washington, DC. \nD\nEARSENATORS : As to your question about \nDonors Trust and Donors Capital, we had never heard of these organizations until you brought them to our attention. We do not provide funding to them. \nAt ExxonMobil we too have been following \nthe deliberately misleading stories regarding our company published by the climate activ-ist organization InsideClimate News and by various media outlets. If you are interested in our response, please visit our corporate blog: http://www.exxonmobilperspectives .com. \nFrom the very beginning of concern about \nclimate change, ExxonMobil scientists and engineers have been involved in discussions and analysis of climate change. These efforts started internally as early as the 1970s. They led to work with the U.N.’s Intergovern-mental Panel on Climate Change and col-laboration with academic institutions and to reaching out to policymakers and others, who sought to advance scientific under-standing and policy dialogue. \nWe believe the risks of climate change are \nserious and warrant thoughtful action. We also believe that by taking sound and wise actions now we can better mitigate and man-age those risks. But as policymakers work to reduce emissions, it is critical to recognize \nthe importance of reliable and affordable en-ergy in supporting human progress across so-ciety and the economy. \nSound tax, legal, and regulatory frame-\nworks are essential. With sound policies en-acted, investment, innovation, and coopera-tion can flourish. In our view, policy works best when it maintains a level playing field; opens the doors for competition; and refrains from picking winners and losers. \nWhen considering policy options to address \nthe risks of climate change, we urge you to draw from the best insights from economics, \nscience, and engineering. The U.S. has achieved remarkable reductions in not just greenhouse gas intensity measures, but in absolute levels of carbon dioxide emissions as a result of large-scale fuel switching from coal to natural gas for electricity genera-tion. Thoughtful regulatory initiatives di-rected to both energy and building efficiency standards, as well as continued improve-ments in emissions levels related to indus-trial processes, have also contributed to the reduction in the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. \nAs you consider additional policy options, \nsuch as putting a more direct cost on carbon to incentivize different choices, we suggest that these policies ensure a uniform and pre-dictable carbon cost across the economy and allow competitive market forces to drive so-lutions. We believe this approach will maxi-mize transparency, reduce complexity, and promote global participation. \nYou are probably aware that ExxonMobil \nhas for a number of years held the view that a ‘‘revenue-neutral carbon tax’’ is the best option to fulfill these key principles. Instead of subsidies and mandates that distort mar-kets, stifle innovation, and raise energy costs, such a carbon tax could help create the conditions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a way that spurs new effi-ciencies and new technologies. The revenue- neutral carbon tax could be a workable pol-icy framework for countries around the world—and the policy most likely to pre-serve the ability of every sector of society to seek out new efficiencies and new tech-nologies. \nSincerely, \nT\nHERESA M. F ARIELLO , \nVice President, Washington Office. \nMr. WHITEHOUSE. I suggest the ab-\nsence of a quorum. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. \nLANKFORD ). The clerk will call the roll. \nThe legislative clerk proceeded to \ncall the roll. \nMr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nPRESIDENT’S STRATEGY TO \nDEFEAT ISIS \nMr. CORNYN. Mr. President, just \nyesterday President Obama went to the Pentagon for a long overdue meeting with his national security advisers. During that meeting or shortly there-after, he made this statement: ‘‘We are hitting ISIL harder than ever.’’ Unfor-tunately, the President failed to ac-knowledge the simple fact that his strategy against ISIL—or ISIS, as it is more frequently called—is simply not working. \nThis is pretty hard to get right, but \nat least our leaders should have the hu-mility to recognize reality, and when things aren’t working out so well, re-consider and make some midcourse changes so they do work—not this President. I have said repeatedly that the President needs to tell Congress and the American people about his comprehensive strategy to defeat this terrorist enemy, and he has to do more to give our military the flexibility and resources they need to accomplish the mission. It is simply wrong to ask our \nmilitary to accomplish something and not give them the freedom, flexibility, and resources they need in order to ac-complish it. \nThat is why when the President talks \nabout airstrikes—I know of no military leader who believes that you can defeat this terrorist army in Syria and Iraq by airstrikes alone. Nobody. Yet that seems to be the only tactic this Presi-dent is using. So the President needs to tell the American people the truth about the realities on the ground in Iraq and Syria. He needs to listen and take advice from the military leader-ship he has at the Pentagon and on his own staff. Above all, he needs to learn not to be ashamed of American leader-ship. \nIt is absolutely true that America \ndoesn’t necessarily need to fight the wars for other countries in the region that ought to be engaged in the fight themselves, but the fact is there is no one else on the planet who can lead like the United States of America. We have to organize it, we have to lead it, and we have to support it if we expect other people to be the boots on the ground to fight those wars, but the ac-tion we are seeing currently from this administration does not match the very serious threat we face, and it is a threat that has gotten worse, not bet-ter, under the President. \nCIA Director John Brennan recently \nestimated that before President Obama prematurely pulled all U.S. troops out of Iraq, without any sort of transition at all, the predecessor of ISIS, known as Al Qaeda in Iraq, had ‘‘maybe 700-or- so adherents left.’’ This is the CIA Di-rector, nominated by President Obama and confirmed by the Senate. He said, before the President pulled the plug in Iraq, there were about 700 or so adher-ents left in Al Qaeda in Iraq, the prede-cessor of ISIS. If we fast forward that to today, according to the New York Times, just a few months ago, he said: ‘‘Nearly 30,000 foreign recruits have now poured in to Syria, many to join the Islamic State, a doubling of volun-teers in the last 12 months. . . .’’ \nNearly 30,000 foreign recruits, a dou-\nbling of volunteers in just the last 12 months, these are pretty amazing and concerning numbers but more often they demonstrate how out of touch the President’s remarks are when he says ISIS has been contained or we are hit-ting them harder than we ever have be-fore. It is simply not working. Clearly, we need the President to execute an ef-fective military strategy that results in both the physical destruction of ISIS and the complete rejection of their bankrupt ideology—not just in the Middle East but around the world, including here at home. \nFrequently, when various pundits \nreact when they hear people like me saying the President doesn’t have an effective strategy, they say: OK. What is your strategy? First of all, I am not the Commander in Chief, but we did make some constructive suggestions to \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:07 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.028 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8664 December 15, 2015 \nthe President. Nine other Republican \nSenators joined me in a letter, where we recommended six specific military options that if brought to bear on ISIS, would go a long way toward achieving his stated goal of destroying this ter-rorist army. First, it would take the handcuffs off the U.S. military and let our troops do what they have trained to do and what they have volunteered to do. Increasingly, we need a strategy that doesn’t just handle the fight over there. We need a strategy to handle the fight here at home because of the dan-ger of foreign fighters, of fighters going from the United States to the fight in the Middle East and then returning or \npeople going to Europe. In particular, one concern has been raised by many of our Democratic colleagues is the use of the visa waiver, where you don’t actu-ally need—the 38 countries where you can travel to the United States with-out actually getting a specific visa or having to be interviewed by a consular officer at one of our embassies. This is a potential vulnerability for the United States. \nThe third area beyond the fight over \nthere, beyond the danger of people ex-ploiting the flaws in our screening sys-tem within immigration, whether it is fiance visas, whether it is a visa waiver or whether it is refugees—there is a third area the FBI Director talked about last week when he testified be-fore the Senate Judiciary Committee. He talked about homegrown terror-ists—people like the ones in San Bernardino who did actually travel to the Middle East and come back—but he also included people in the United States, American citizens. I must admit I appreciated the FBI Director’s understanding of the threat that ISIS poses, including their attempts to in-spire people in this country to become terrorists and commit acts of violence. \nThis Senator was astonished that the \nDepartment of Homeland Security would have a policy preventing the United States from screening the social media use by foreign nationals who are attempting to use our immigration system to come to the United States. In the instance of the female shooter in San Bernardino, it was revealed that using social media, she had posted things that should have been an alert— if our immigration officers were doing their job—to the fact that she was like-ly to be a jihadist and be a threat here at home. \nAnother threat we are going to have \nto deal with that Director Comey and the Deputy Attorney General raised is the use of encryption as a challenge that hinders the FBI’s counterintel-ligence efforts against these ISIS-in-spired extremists. Encryption applica-tions are available on your cell phone, and some of the companies—Apple, for example—market them because people want to keep their communications private. We all understand that, but an encrypted message—one that is incapa-ble of being unlocked—is one that can’t be used to respond to a court order when somebody in law enforcement \ngoes to court and says: We have prob-able cause to believe a crime was com-mitted, so we want to execute this search warrant. As Director Comey confirmed, increasingly using encryption is part of terrorist trade craft. \nI was shocked—because I hadn’t \nheard it before—to hear Director \nComey talk about how encryption im-pacted an investigation in my home State of Texas. He said many will re-member that back in May, two men at-tempted to attack people at an event northeast of Dallas in Garland, TX. He said that fortunately the quick and ef-fective response of law enforcement of-ficials in the area stopped the men from making their way into the con-ference center, keeping them from in-flicting more harm. We now know the attack was at least inspired by ISIS. In fact, according to media reports, ISIS quickly claimed responsibility for the attack. \nShockingly, Director Comey said last \nweek before the Senate Judiciary Com-mittee that the FBI had 109 encrypted messages with a terrorist overseas as part of this investigation of the Gar-land incident. According to the FBI Di-rector, that is 109 messages the FBI still doesn’t have access to because they are encrypted and they can’t even crack it given a court order showing probable cause that it might lead to further evidence in this investigation. He pointed out that these sorts of encrypted communications are part of terrorist trade craft. In fact, there is reason to believe that within terror circles, they understand which of these devices and which of these apps are encrypted and thus make it less likely that they will be discovered when they are conspiring against Americans ei-ther here or abroad. \nIt troubles me that the men and \nwomen charged with keeping us safe don’t have all the information they need. I think that is a subject on which we need to have a more serious con-versation. I think that is why Director Comey mentioned that last week, and that is why the Deputy Attorney Gen-eral came to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee to raise the con-cern, so we can have the kind of debate we always have in America when it is a balancing of privacy and security. \nI commend the Director for engaging \nCongress on this critical issue, but what it points out is that the President and this administration need to have a three-pronged strategy when dealing against a terrorist threat: As I men-tioned, over in Syria and Iraq, unhandcuff our military and make sure they have a strategy that will actually work over and above just airstrikes; second, try to make sure we enhance our screening system for immigration for people who come into the United States so we don’t inadvertently allow someone into our country who has the intention of doing us harm; and third, do more to come up with a plan to deal with people being radicalized right \nhere in the United States, not the least of which, I would hope the Department of Homeland Security voluntarily re-verses their policy of not screening so-cial media communications which are in the public domain. I mean, there is no expectation of privacy on the part of people posting things in a public do-main such as Twitter or Facebook, par-ticularly things like Twitter. I know you can restrict access, but most peo-ple communicate with their friends, family, and anybody else who happens to want to have a conversation with them on social media. \nWe can all agree that the threat of \nISIS to the United States is broad and real. Sadly, we were reminded in San Bernardino and in Garland last May of this fact. \nLast week, both in a letter I sent to \nthe President and here on the floor, we sought to make some constructive sug-gestions to begin to have that con-versation, which was long overdue, about what an effective strategy to carry out the President’s stated goal of degrading and destroying ISIS would actually look like. I hope the President listens. Unfortunately, so far experi-ence has taught us he is not nec-essarily primed that way. But I hope he will reconsider in light of the increased public concern about terrorist activity in the United States. Certainly, public opinion polls have shown that is the No. 1 issue of concern to the American people, and as the leader of the U.S. Government and as Commander in Chief, I hope he will have the humility and the common sense to say that what we are doing now is not working the way it should. We can do better. We can do more. \nCertainly, if the President would \nwork with us in a bipartisan and bi-cameral fashion, I know we would sup-port a strategy that I think Members of Congress felt had a reasonably de-cent chance of working. But right now the President seems stuck on this same inadequate strategy of just bombing missions. These airstrikes are nec-essary but not sufficient to get the job done over there. It certainly is incom-plete when you look at the threat in terms of exploiting our immigration system and in terms of homegrown radicalism. We haven’t heard the kind of plan that we need to hear from the President of the United States that we are willing to work with him on. We need to hear from him what he is will-ing to do to help keep the American people safe and to fight and win this war against Islamic radicalism. \nMr. President, I suggest the absence \nof a quorum. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe legislative clerk proceeded to \ncall the roll. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:07 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.029 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8665 December 15, 2015 \nNUCLEAR AGREEMENT WITH IRAN \nMr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, ac-\ncording to press reports, this adminis-tration may be just weeks away from lifting sanctions on Iran. This is de-spite Iran’s recent actions that indi-cate they have little intention to com-ply with the terms of the agreement called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran nuclear deal. Most recently, the International Atomic Energy Agency released the final report on the possible military di-mensions of the Iranian nuclear pro-gram. It is quite clear Iran was less than cooperative with the Inter-national Atomic Energy Agency. For some reason, despite Iran’s stonewalling, the President seems in-tent and confident that they know the extent of Iran’s past nuclear weaponization work. \nIt is important to remember the evo-\nlution of the importance of this infor-mation. In April 2015, Secretary Kerry stated in an interview that Iran must disclose its past military-related nu-clear activities as part of any final deal. His words on this matter were un-\nequivocal. \nHe stated: \nThey have to do it. It will be done. If \nthere’s going to be a deal it will be done. It will be part of the final agreement. It has to be. \nJust a few weeks later, when it was \nclear President Obama’s administra-tion was ready to surrender to Iran’s demands on this issue, Secretary Kerry said that we didn’t need a full account-ing of Iran’s past activities. He said the U.S. intelligence agencies already had ‘‘perfect knowledge’’ of Iran’s activi-ties. \nJust a few days ago, the Inter-\nnational Atomic Energy Agency re-leased their report, which was supposed to be a comprehensive overview of Iran’s nuclear program and their past military dimensions of that program. Because of Iran’s obstruction, the re-port is far from comprehensive—as we were promised. \nThe International Atomic Energy \nAgency report essentially concludes what many of us have known for a very long time. Iran was working toward de-veloping nuclear weapons capability and they have continually lied and con-tinually misled the international com-munity regarding that program. The International Atomic Energy Agency also concluded that Iran’s nuclear weapons program was in operation until 2009, several years later than many believed. \nPresident Obama repeatedly stated \nthat the nuclear agreement was based on unprecedented verification. Yet it is very clear from the International Atomic Energy Agency report that Iran had no intention of cooperating with the requirement that they come clean on their nuclear program. In many areas, the International Atomic Energy Agency indicated that Iran pro-vided little information, misleading re-sponses, and even worked to conceal portions of that program. Many of the questions around the \nParchin military facility remain unan-swered. This report from the Inter-national Atomic Energy Agency states: \nThe information available to the Agency, \nincluding the results of the sampling anal-ysis and the satellite imagery, does not sup-port Iran’s statement on the purpose of the building. The Agency assesses that the ex-tensive activities undertaken by Iran since February 2012 at the particular location of interest to the Agency seriously undermined the Agency’s ability to conduct effective ver-ification. \nAn effective verification was what we \nwere promised. The Iranians were ac-tively working to cover up and destroy any evidence of their weaponization ef-forts at Parchin. On many occasions, Iran refused to provide any informa-tion or simply reiterated previous deni-als. Iran refused to cooperate and in-stead continues to deceive the inter-national community on the military dimensions of its nuclear program. Some may wonder why we should even care about this. It matters because a complete and accurate declaration of all nuclear weapons activity is a crit-ical first step in the verification re-gime and the safeguard process that the International Atomic Energy Agen-cy will be asked to enforce and some-thing we put our confidence in. I shouldn’t say ‘‘we’’ because I didn’t vote for it—but something this country puts its confidence in this Agency’s ability to enforce. There must be a baseline declaration to ensure effective international monitoring going for-ward. \nIt also matters because President \nObama entered into an agreement, along with our allies, to provide sanc-tions relief in exchange for Iran giving up its efforts to develop nuclear weap-ons. It matters because it is clear we do not have ‘‘perfect knowledge’’— which we were promised—of what Iran is up to, as Secretary Kerry has claimed. It also matters because since the agreement was finalized, Iranian leadership has not changed their be-havior. If anything, they have in-creased their hostility. Here are some examples of hostility: On October 10, Iran launched a long-range ballistic missile. This is clearly in violation of Security Council Resolution 1929. Then, on November 21, Iran launched another ballistic missile. \nIt is clear that Iran has no intention \nto comply with the ballistic missile re-strictions of this deal. These are bla-tant violations. How are we supposed to have any faith in this agreement or Iran’s intent to comply? Iran did not comply with the International Atomic Energy Agency. They have continued to test ballistic missiles. They con-tinue to hold Americans hostage. A Washington Post reporter has been im-prisoned for more than 500 days and was recently convicted of unspecified charges in a sham trial. Iran has no in-tention to honor any of their obliga-tions under this deal. It is naive to think otherwise. As a recent Wall Street Journal editorial put it, ‘‘The larger point is that the nuclear deal \nhas already become a case of Iran pre-tending not to cheat while the West pretends not to notice.’’ \nI hope President Obama and his ad-\nministration finally wake up and quickly recognize Iran’s track record of noncompliance. Iran cannot and should not be rewarded with sanctions relief. The international community should not reward Iran with sanctions relief while Iran doubles down on its confrontational and uncooperative be-havior. They should not be given hun-dreds of billions of dollars while con-tinuing to defy and deceive the inter-national community. \nMr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe bill clerk proceeded to call the \nroll. \nMrs. M\nCCASKILL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nUNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST— \nS. 579 \nMrs. M CCASKILL. Mr. President, I \nam on the floor this afternoon to talk about S. 579, which is called the Inspec-tor General Empowerment Act, but it really ought to be called ‘‘Let the in-spectors general do their jobs.’’ \nAs I look back on my time as a State \nauditor and I think of all I learned about how government works well and how government behaves badly, I have a special point of respect for inspectors general because of the work I did as an auditor. I believe they are our first line of defense against waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars. We should be helping them every way we can to do their jobs. \nI want to thank Senator J\nOHNSON , \nthe chairman of the committee I serve on that has primary jurisdiction on government oversight, and I want to thank Senator G\nRASSLEY for his long \nchampioning the cause of inspectors general and the GAO and all of the noble public servants who are out there every day trying to uncover govern-ment behaving badly. \nThis bill serves three main purposes. \nIt provides additional authority to in-spectors general to enhance their abil-ity to conduct oversight investiga-tions. It reforms the process by which the Council of the Inspectors General integrity committee investigates accu-sations against IGs, which is very im-portant. IGs need to be above reproach. Any whiff of politics, any whiff of un-ethical conduct, any whiff of self-deal-ing—we have to empower the Council of the Inspectors General to deal with that in a way that is effective. \nIt restores the intent of the 1978 In-\nspectors General Act to ensure that IGs have timely access to documents they need to conduct good, comprehensive oversight audits and investigations. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.032 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8666 December 15, 2015 \nMany of the provisions are authorities \nthat the IGs have been seeking for a long time, and most of them are be-yond noncontroversial. \nI wish to focus on one section of the \nbill for a minute and explain how crit-ical its provision is to congressional overseers and for the taxpayers. The main issue I wish to talk about today is the section of the bill that ensures IGs have access to all agency docu-ments. The Inspector General Act, which was passed in 1978, explicitly grants access to ‘‘all records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other material.’’ \nFor the last 37 years, we lived in a \nworld where ‘‘all’’ meant all. But this summer, the Department of Justice Of-fice of Legal Counsel issued an opinion that allows agencies to withhold docu-ments from the inspectors general. Other than national security concerns, intelligence concerns, and statutes that explicitly restrict disclosure of documents to IGs, all of which are ad-dressed by this bill, there is absolutely no reason that IGs should have their access to documents restricted. There is no universe in which the Inspector General Act should be interpreted to mean anything less than what it says. They have to have access to the docu-ments or they can’t do their work. It really isn’t any more complicated than that. \nThe convoluted legal reasoning that \nis being implemented by the counsel at the Department of Justice is a big step backwards for effective oversight of our government. We can’t expect them to do their jobs well without fear or favor if they can’t get access to the in-formation that is vital to their work. \nWhen the auditors in my office came \nback with an access issue, my instruc-tion to them was this: Well, get on your ‘‘dog with a bone act,’’ because if they are trying to withhold documents from you, there is something in those documents we need to see. \nI think if every agency knows that \nthe inspector general has access to doc-uments, it will have a deterrent effect on people behaving badly with tax-payer money or engaging in self-deal-ing or other activities that frustrate taxpayers and heighten the level of cynicism that, frankly, right now is breaking my heart in this country about our government. \nI join with my Republican colleagues \ntoday in asking unanimous consent for this bill to be brought up. We have worked on it for years. It is time. I ap-preciate the hard work of both on this, and I stand shoulder to shoulder with them trying to get this one across the finish line. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from Wisconsin. \nMr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise \ntoday to urge my colleagues to pass S. 579, the Inspector General Empower-ment Act of 2015. I want to thank Sen-ator M\nCCASKILL for her hard work on \nthis and her support and Senator G\nRASSLEY for his many years as a real champion of this cause, as well as the \nother bipartisan cosponsors of this leg-islation and for the work their staff have done on this very important issue. \nIn 1978 Congress created a crucial \noversight partner for all of us—inspec-tors general. They are independent watchdogs embedded in each agency, accountable only to Congress and the American people. That is crucial. They are the American people’s eyes and ears, and they are our best partner in rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse. As an example, in fiscal year 2014 alone, inspectors general identified $45 billion in potential savings to the taxpayer. \nWhat this bill aims to do is to reduce \nwaste, fraud, and abuse by increasing accountability and ensuring trans-parency. The bill exempts inspectors \ngeneral from time-consuming and inde-pendence-threatening requirements such as the computer matching and pa-perwork reduction statutes. It allows inspectors general to compel the testi-mony of former agency employees or Federal contractors and grant recipi-ents in some administrative mis-conduct or civil fraud cases. \nToo often we lose crucial information \nor have to end an investigation because the bad actor either leaves Federal em-ployment or is a contractor or grantee and under current law cannot be sub-poenaed. For example, the State De-partment inspector general oversees the $10.5 billion the agency obligates in grants every year yet cannot compel testimony of the grant recipients even in the event of suspected fraud or mis-conduct. He can only require current agency employees to speak to his team, which can result in an incomplete or one-sided investigation. If we care about oversight and accountability, in-spectors general must be able to com-pel relevant testimony. In addition to these authorities, the bill requires in-spectors general to publish reports within 3 days to ensure transparency and accountability. \nI want to spend a little bit of time on \nthe transparency aspect of this. Like many places around the country, we have seen some real problems with the VA health care system. There was a scandal in the Tomah facility in Tomah, WI. The result of that tragedy was that people died. I will never forget a call that I made to the surviving daughter of Mr. Thomas Baer, a vet-eran who went to the Tomah facility seeking care with stroke-like symp-toms. Thomas Baer sat in the waiting room for 2 or 3 hours. He suffered a couple of strokes and died. I talked to his surviving daughter, Candace Baer, and I will never forget the fact that she said to me: Senator, had I only known, had I only known there were problems with the Tomah VA health facility, I never would have taken my father there, and my father would be alive today. That is how important trans-parency and accountability is. That is what this bill restores to the inspectors general. \nFinally, the bill reiterates that in-\nspectors general should have access to all agency documents necessary to do \ntheir job, unless Congress expressly de-nies that access by statute. The bill not only maintains current authorities for certain agency heads to keep in-spector general work if it is necessary to preserve the country’s national se-curity interests, it actually enhances those authorities. \nIn sum, this is a bipartisan common-\nsense cause. We all want inspectors general to be able to do their jobs well. That is why this bill was unanimously approved by my committee—the Sen-ate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. It is why it has 14 bipartisan cosponsors rep-resenting Committees of the Judiciary, Appropriations, Armed Services, En-ergy and Natural Resources, and the Senate Intelligence Committee. \nEven retired Senator John Glenn has \nasked my committee to take action to ensure inspectors general have access to documents. In the letter he wrote to my committee and to the House over-sight committee, Senator Glenn says: ‘‘The success of the IG Act is rooted in the principles on which the Act is grounded—independence, direct report-ing to Congress, dedicated staff and re-sources, unrestricted access to agency records, subpoena power, special pro-tections for agency employees who co-operate with the IG, and the ability to refer criminal matters to the Depart-ment of Justice without clearing such referrals through the agency.’’ \nThis is the heart of what the Inspec-\ntor General Act asked for. This is what this bill restores. I cannot imagine anything controversial about wanting inspectors general to have access to the people and the documents they need to do their jobs. Americans de-serve an accountable, transparent, and effective government. This is one tan-gible thing that we can do to help achieve that common goal. \nI urge my colleagues to pass S. 579 \ntoday. \nMr. President, I ask unanimous con-\nsent to have printed in the R\nECORD an \nexcellent article that appeared in the New York Times, as well as the letter we received from Senator John Glenn. \nThere being no objection, the mate-\nrial was ordered to be printed in the R\nECORD , as follows: \n[From the New York Times, Nov. 27, 2015] \nTIGHTER LID ON RECORDS THREATENS TO \nWEAKEN GOVERNMENT WATCHDOGS \n(By Eric Lichtblau) \nWASHINGTON .—Justice Department watch-\ndogs ran into an unexpected roadblock last year when they began examining the role of federal drug agents in the fatal shootings of unarmed civilians during raids in Honduras. \nThe Drug Enforcement Administration \nbalked at turning over emails from senior of-ficials tied to the raids, according to the de-partment’s inspector general. It took nearly a year of wrangling before the D.E.A. was willing to turn over all its records in a case that the inspector general said raised ‘‘seri-ous questions’’ about agents’ use of deadly force. \nThe continuing Honduran inquiry is one of \nat least 20 investigations across the govern-ment that have been slowed, stymied or \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.034 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8667 December 15, 2015 \nsometimes closed because of a long-sim-\nmering dispute between the Obama adminis-tration and its own watchdogs over the shrinking access of inspectors general to confidential records, according to records and interviews. \nThe impasse has hampered investigations \ninto an array of programs and abuse re-ports—from allegations of sexual assaults in the Peace Corps to the F.B.I.’s terrorism powers, officials said. And it has threatened to roll back more than three decades of pol-icy giving the watchdogs unfettered access to ‘‘all records’’ in their investigations. \n‘‘The bottom line is that we’re no longer \nindependent,’’ Michael E. Horowitz, the Jus-tice Department inspector general, said in an interview. \nThe restrictions reflect a broader effort by \nthe Obama administration to prevent unau-thorized disclosures of sensitive informa-tion—at the expense, some watchdogs insist, of government oversight. \nJustice Department lawyers concluded in a \nlegal opinion this summer that some pro-tected records, like grand jury transcripts, wiretap intercepts and financial credit re-ports, could be kept off limits to government investigators. The administration insists there is no intention of curtailing investiga-tions, but both Democrats and Republicans in Congress have expressed alarm and are promising to restore full access to the watchdogs. \nThe new restrictions grew out of a five- \nyear-old dispute within the Justice Depart-ment. After a series of scathing reports by Glenn Fine, then the Justice Department in-spector general, on F.B.I. abuses in counter-terrorism programs, F.B.I. lawyers began as-serting in 2010 that he could no longer have access to certain confidential records be-cause they were legally protected. \nThat led to a series of high-level Justice \nDepartment reviews, a new procedure for re-viewing records requests and, ultimately, a formal opinion in July from the depart-ment’s Office of Legal Counsel. That opinion, which applies to federal agencies across the government, concluded that the 1978 law giv-ing an inspector general access to ‘‘all \nrecords’’ in investigations did not nec-essarily mean all records when it came to material like wiretap intercepts and grand jury reports. \nThe inspector-general system was created \nin 1978 in the wake of Watergate as an inde-pendent check on government abuse, and it has grown to include watchdogs at 72 federal agencies. Their investigations have produced thousands of often searing public reports on everything from secret terrorism programs and disaster responses to boondoggles like a lavish government conference in Las Vegas in 2010 that featured a clown and a mind reader. \nNot surprisingly, tensions are common be-\ntween the watchdogs and the officials they investigate. President Ronald Reagan, in fact, fired 15 inspectors general in 1981. But a number of scholars and investigators said the restrictions imposed by the Obama ad-ministration reflect a new level of acrimony. \n‘‘This is by far the most aggressive assault \non the inspector general concept since the beginning,’’ said Paul Light, a New York University professor who has studied the sys-tem. ‘‘It’s the complete evisceration of the concept. You might as well fold them down. They’ve become defanged.’’ \nWhile President Obama has boasted of run-\nning ‘‘the most transparent administration in history,’’ some watchdogs say the clampdown has scaled back scrutiny of gov-ernment programs. \n‘‘This runs against transparency,’’ said the \nPeace Corps inspector general, Kathy Buller. \nAt the Peace Corps, her office began run-\nning into problems two years ago in an in-vestigation into the agency’s handling of al-\nlegations of sexual assaults against overseas volunteers. Congress mandated a review after a volunteer in Benin was murdered in 2009; several dozen volunteers reported that the Peace Corps ignored or mishandled sex-ual abuse claims. \nBut Peace Corps lawyers initially refused \nto turn over abuse reports, citing privacy re-strictions. Even after reaching an agreement opening up some material, Ms. Buller said investigators have been able to get records that are heavily redacted. \n‘‘It’s been incredibly frustrating,’’ she said. \n‘‘We have spent so much time and energy ar-guing with the agency over this issue.’’ \nThe Peace Corps said in a statement, how-\never, that it was committed to ‘‘rigorous oversight’’ and has cooperated fully with the inspector general. \nAgencies facing investigations are now \nsometimes relying on the Justice Depart-ment’s opinion as justification for denying records—even records that are not specifi-cally covered in the opinion, officials said. \nAt the Commerce Department, the inspec-\ntor general this year shut down an internal audit of enforcement of international trade agreements because the department’s law-yers, citing the Justice Department’s guid-ance, refused to turn over business records that they said were ‘‘proprietary’’ and pro-tected. \nThe Environmental Protection Agency’s \ninspector general has reported a series of \nstruggles with the organization over its ac-cess to documents, including records the agency said were classified or covered by at-torney-client privilege. And investigators at the Postal Service, a special Afghanistan re-construction board, and other federal agen-cies have complained of tightened restric-tions on investigative records as well. \nHopes of a quick end to the impasse have \ndimmed in recent days after the Obama ad-ministration volunteered to restore full ac-cess for the Justice Department’s inspector general—but not the other 71 watchdogs. \nAttorney General Loretta E. Lynch, asked \nabout the issue at a House hearing last week, said the proposal was intended to ensure, at least at the Justice Department, ‘‘that the inspector general would receive all the infor-mation he needed.’’ \nBut watchdogs outside the Justice Depart-\nment said they would be left dependent on the whims of agency officials in their inves-tigations. \n‘‘It’s no fix at all,’’ said Senator Charles E. \nGrassley, Republican of Iowa, who leads the Judiciary Committee. \nIn a rare show of bipartisanship, the ad-\nministration has drawn scorn from Demo-crats and Republicans. The Obama adminis-tration’s stance has ‘‘blocked what was once a free flow of information’’ to the watchdogs, Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Com-mittee, said at a hearing. \nA Justice Department spokeswoman, \nEmily Pierce, said in a statement on Friday: ‘‘Justice Department leadership has issued policy guidance to ensure that our inspector general gets the documents he requests as quickly as possible, even when those docu-ments are protected by other statutes pro-tecting sensitive information. The depart-ment is unaware of any instance in which the inspector general has sought access to documents or information protected from disclosure by statute and did not receive them.’’ \nNowhere has the fallout over the dispute \nbeen felt more acutely than at the Justice Department, where the inspector general’s office said 14 investigations had been hin-dered by the restricted access. \nThese include investigations into the \nF.B.I.’s use of phone records collected by the National Security Agency, the government’s \nsharing of intelligence information before the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, a noto-rious gun-tracing operation known as ‘‘Fast and Furious’’ and the deadly Honduran drug raids. \nIn the case of the Honduran raids, the in-\nspector general has been trying to piece to-gether the exact role of D.E.A. agents in par-ticipating in, or even leading, a series of con-troversial drug raids there beginning in 2011. \nDetails of what happened remain sketchy \neven today, but drug agents in a helicopter in 2012 reportedly killed four unarmed vil-lagers in a boat, including a pregnant woman and a 14-year-old boy, during a raid on sus-pected drug smugglers in northeastern Hon-duras. They also shot down several private planes—suspected of carrying drugs—in pos-sible violation of international law. \nAn investigation by the Honduran govern-\nment cleared American agents of responsi-bility. But when the inspector general began examining the case last year, D.E.A. officials refused to turn over emails on the episodes from senior executives, the inspector gen-eral’s office said. Only after more than 11 months of back-and-forth negotiations were all the records turned over. \nThe D.E.A. refused to comment on the \ncase, citing the investigation. A senior Jus-tice Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the con-tinuing review, said the refusal to turn over the records was the flawed result of ‘‘a cul-ture within the D.E.A.’’ at the time—and not the result of the Justice Department’s new legal restrictions. \nMr. Horowitz, the inspector general, said \nthe long delay was a significant setback to his investigation. He now hopes to complete the Honduran review early next year. \nIn the meantime, the watchdogs say they \nare looking to Congress to intervene in a dis-pute with the administration that has be-come increasingly messy. \n‘‘It’s essential to enshrine in the law that \nthe inspector general has access to all agen-cy records,’’ said Mr. Fine, who is now the Pentagon’s principal deputy inspector gen-eral. ‘‘The underlying principle is key: To be an effective inspector general, you need the right to receive timely access to all agency records.’’ \nJULY23, 2015. \nHon. R ONJOHNSON , \nChairman, Committee on Homeland Security \nand Governmental Affairs. \nHon. J ASON CHAFFETZ , \nChairman, Committee on Oversight and Govern-\nment Reform. \nDEAR SENATOR JOHNSON AND REPRESENTA -\nTIVE CHAFFETZ : Since the enactment of the \nInspector General Act in 1978, the Inspectors General have provided independent oversight of government programs and operations and pursued prosecution of criminal activity against the government’s interests. Rec-ommendations from IG audits have led to improvements in the economy and efficiency of government programs that have resulted in better delivery of needed services to countless citizens. Investigations of those who violate the public trust to enrich them-selves at the expense of honest taxpayers, of contractors who skirt the rules to illegally inflate their profits, and of others who devise criminal schemes to defraud the government have led to billions of dollars being returned to the U.S. Treasury. \nThe success of the IG Act is rooted in the \nprinciples on which the Act is grounded— independence, direct reporting to Congress, dedicated staff and resources, unrestricted access to agency records, subpoena power, special protections for agency employees who cooperate with the IG, and the ability \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:01 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.005 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8668 December 15, 2015 \nto refer criminal matters to the Department \nof Justice without clearing such referrals through the agency. We considered these safeguards to be vital when we developed the Act and they remain essential today. No other entity within government has the unique role and responsibility of Inspectors General, and their ability to accomplish their critical mission depends on the preser-vation of the principles underlying the In-spector General Act. \nIn recent years, IGs have experienced chal-\nlenges to their ability to have independent access to records and information in their host agencies. Broad independent access to such records is a fundamental tenet in the IG Act and to compromise or in any way erode such access would strike at the heart of im-portant law. In short, full and unfettered ac-cess is vital to an IG’s ability to effectively prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in agency programs and activities. \nThe Inspector General Act has stood the \ntest of time. The billions of dollars recovered for the government and the increased effi-ciency and effectiveness of government pro-grams and operations are a testament to the Act’s continued success. Any action that would impair the IG’s ability to achieve their mission—particularly the denial of full and independent access to agency records and information—would have an immeas-urable adverse impact and severely damage their critical oversight function. For this reason, I urge you to take action to protect the independent access rights of Inspectors General. \nSincerely, \nJ\nOHNGLENN , \nUnited States Senator (Ret.). \nMr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I yield \nthe floor. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from Iowa. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, first \nof all, I wish to compliment Senator M\nCCASKILL and Senator J OHNSON for \ntheir leadership in bringing this bill out of their committee—a committee I don’t serve on but a bill that is very important to the oversight work of this Senator, and I hope every Senator con-siders it to be very important. I would say that I agree with everything they have said. I want to emphasize what they said, and I want to take a few minutes to do that because I feel strongly about this piece of legislation. \nThere is an important principle \nhere—a very important principle—that we ought to keep in mind, because it is an insult to 100 Senators and 435 Mem-bers of the House of Representatives when legislation is written and it is ex-plained very clearly what that legisla-tion is supposed to accomplish: that an inspector general would have access to all records. Then we have a lawyer in the Office of Legal Counsel in the De-partment of Justice—one person mak-ing an interpretation of a law that is contrary to congressional intent—that one person out of 2 million people in the executive branch of government can override the will of 535 Members of Congress. That will was expressed way back in 1978. \nThis is just a little different quote \nfrom a letter Senator J\nOHNSON has al-\nready talked about from a respected Member of this Senate for 24 or maybe 30 years, Senator John Glenn of Ohio, who was very much interested in mak-\ning sure that we had strong oversight by Congress and that within the execu-tive branch, they had strong oversight that the IG would do within a specific department. \nSenator John Glenn of Ohio was one \nof the chief architects of this legisla-tion. He said: ‘‘Full and unfettered ac-cess is vital to an IG’s ability to effec-tively prevent and detect waste, fraud, and abuse in an agency’s programs and activities.’’ \nHere we are with what Senator John \nGlenn said when he was a Member of this body and this legislation passed. Then we have one lawyer out of 2 mil-lion executive branch employees inter-preting a statute contrary to congres-sional intent and then overriding it—in other words, giving Cabinet heads op-portunities to avoid doing what the in-spector general law says and what an inspector general needs to do to do their job: have access to all records. \nSenator M\nCCASKILL made that clear. \nSenator J OHNSON made that clear. This \nis a bipartisan effort coming unani-mously out of this committee, that this is an egregious attack on the pow-ers of Congress and we can’t let one person out of 2 million people in the ex-ecutive branch of the government get away with it. Yet we seem to have some problems getting it passed. I don’t understand it. You try to explain that to the people of this country, whether it is in New York City or whether it is in Des Moines, IA. There is no way this can be justified, that one lawyer out of 2 million people in the executive branch of government can issue an opinion and override the Con-gress of the United States. \nI intend to go into some detail about \nhow I feel about this legislation, if my colleagues haven’t come to that con-clusion already. To ensure account-ability and transparency in govern-ment, Congress created inspectors gen-eral, or IGs, as our eyes and ears within the executive branch. That is the fore-sight of one famous Senator and astro-naut by the name of John Glenn. But IGs cannot do their job without timely and independent access to all agency records. That is why this bill is called ‘‘all means all.’’ Agencies cannot be trusted not to restrict the flow of po-tentially embarrassing documents to the IGs who oversee them. If the agen-cies can keep IGs in the dark, then this Congress will be kept in the dark as well. \nWhen Congress passed the Inspectors \nGeneral Act of 1978, the Congress ex-plicitly said that IGs should have ac-cess to all agency records. Inspectors general are designed to be independent but to also be part of an agency. In-spectors general are there to help agen-cy leadership identify and correct waste, fraud, and abuse. What Cabinet head wouldn’t want somebody in their department to have access to all records that show that maybe that de-partment isn’t spending money accord-ing to congressional intent or maybe not following the law the way Congress \nintended? It ought to be welcome by any administration head. \nFights between an agency and its \nown inspector general over access to documents are a waste of taxpayers’ money and personnel time. The law re-quires that inspectors general have ac-cess to all agency records—precisely, by the way, to avoid these costly and time-consuming disputes. However, since 2010, a handful of agencies, led by \nthe FBI—and I respect the FBI, but in this case I don’t—has refused to com-ply with this legal obligation. \nThe Justice Department claimed that \nthe inspector general could not access certain records until—guess what—de-partment leadership gave them permis-sion to do it, even though the law says they are entitled to all documents. Re-quiring private approval from agency leadership for access to agency infor-mation undermines inspectors general independence. That is bad enough, but it also causes wasteful delays. \nAfter this access problem came to \nlight, Congress took action. So we have the 2015 Department of Justice Appro-priations Act declaring—this is Con-gress again declaring—that no funds should be used to deny the inspector general timely access to all records. In other words, just this year—or last year when the appropriations bill was passed for 2015—we had Members of Congress saying that this lawyer, out of 2 million executive branch employ-ees, who is frustrating the will of Con-gress is wrong. \nThis new law directed the inspector \ngeneral to report to Congress within 5 days whenever there was a failure to comply with this requirement. In Feb-ruary alone, the Justice Department’s IG notified Congress of three separate occasions in which the FBI failed to provide access to records requested for oversight investigations. IGs for the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Commerce, and the Peace Corps have experienced similar stonewalling. \nThen, in July, the Justice Depart-\nment’s Office of Legal Counsel—that is this one lawyer out of 2 million em-ployees—the Office of Legal Counsel re-leased a memo arguing that we did not really mean ‘‘all records’’ when we put those words in the statute. Here we have somebody in the Justice Depart-ment—one person out of 2 million em-ployees—trying to tell 535 Members of Congress what they meant when they said ‘‘all’’ means all. So let me be clear. We meant what we said in the IG act: ‘‘All records’’ really means all records. \nI told my colleagues about the De-\npartment of Justice Appropriations Act responding to this a year ago. Well, 1 week after this report was issued, that the Office of Legal Counsel issued its awful legal opinion, Senator M\nIKUL-\nSKI and Senator S HELBY —both out-\nstanding members of the Committee on Appropriations—sent a letter to the Justice Department correcting the Of-fice of Legal Counsel’s misreading of \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.009 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8669 December 15, 2015 \nthe appropriations rider, also known as \nsection 218. I would like to read from the Mikulski and Shelby letter: \nWe write to inform you that the OLC’s in-\nterpretation of section 218 is wrong and the subsequent conclusion of our committee’s in-tention is wrong. We expect the department and all of its agencies to fully comply with section 218 and to provide the Office of In-spector General with full and immediate ac-cess to all records, documents, and other ma-terials in accordance with section 6(a) of the Inspectors General Act. \nSo we wrote a statute in 1978. We \nhave no problems with it until this per-son—one lawyer out of 2 million execu-tive branch employees—writes an opin-ion saying ‘‘all’’ doesn’t mean all. Then we have Members of the body who are insulted by that interpretation, and these Members write: No money in this appropriations bill can be used to carry out that Office of Legal Counsel opin-ion. And, if they would have listened to the members of the Appropriations \nCommittee, Senator J\nOHNSON and Sen-\nator M CCASKILL would not have to \nwork so hard to correct a bad opinion, contrary to congressional intent, that was written by the Office of Legal Counsel. \nI applaud my colleagues on the Ap-\npropriations Committee, particularly Senators M\nIKULSKI and S HELBY , for \nstanding up for the inspectors general. \nIn early August I chaired a Judiciary \nCommittee hearing on the Office of Legal Counsel opinion and the dev-astating impact it is already having on the work of inspectors general across the country. Remember, the Office of Legal Counsel is in the Justice Depart-ment. Well, we had a Justice Depart-ment witness before our committee disagree with the results of the Office of Legal Counsel opinion and actually support legislative action to solve the problem. \nSo following the hearing, 11 of my \ncolleagues and I sent a bipartisan—I want to emphasize bipartisan—as well as bicameral letter to the Department of Justice and the entire inspectors general community. In this letter, the chairs and ranking members of the committee of jurisdiction in both the House and the Senate asked for specific legislative language to reaffirm that ‘‘all’’ means all. As the witness from the Justice Department said, there ought to be legislative language to cor-rect this awful interpretation by one lawyer out of 2 million employees in the executive branch, overriding 535 Members of Congress. \nIt took the Justice Department 3 \nmonths to respond to this letter, and its proposed language was far too nar-row to actually override this Office of Legal Counsel opinion. However, the inspectors general community re-sponded to our letter within 2 weeks. In September, a bipartisan group of Senators and I incorporated the core of this language into the bill we are talk-ing about today, S. 579. It is entitled the ‘‘Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2015.’’ In total, 13 colleagues have joined me on this bill: Senators J\nOHNSON , MCCASKILL , ERNST , BALDWIN , \nCARPER , CORNYN , LANKFORD , COLLINS , \nAYOTTE , KIRK, MIKULSKI , FISCHER , and \nWYDEN . It is bipartisan. \nI am grateful to each of them for \nstanding up with me for inspectors gen-eral. I especially want to thank Sen-ators J\nOHNSON and M CCASKILL , as I \nhave already done, but do it again for working closely with me on this legis-lation from the very beginning and for their work in getting this bill through their committee. \nLet me tell you what this bill does. \nThe Inspector General Empowerment Act includes further clarification that Congress intended IGs to have access to all agency records, notwithstanding any other provision of law, unless other laws specifically state that IGs are not to receive such access. \nLet me be clear. The purpose of this \nprovision is to nullify and overturn this awful decision that this one law-yer in the Department of Justice out of 2 million-plus Federal employees in the executive branch issued this opinion. These words, notwithstanding any other provision of law, are key to ac-complishing that goal, but the bill does much more than overturning the OLC opinion, which has been roundly criti-cized by both sides of the aisle. It bol-sters IG independence by preventing agency heads from placing them on ar-bitrary and indefinite administrative leave. It promotes transparency by re-quiring IGs to post more of their re-ports online, including those involving misconduct by senior officials that the Justice Department chose not to pros-ecute. \nAlso, the bill equips IGs with tools \nthey need to conduct effective inves-tigation, such as the ability to sub-poena testimony from former Federal employees. When employees of the U.S. Government are accused of wrongdoing or misconduct, IGs should be able to conduct a full and thorough investiga-tion of those allegations. Getting to the bottom of these allegations is nec-essary to restore public trust. God only knows how much restoration of public trust in the government in Washington we have to restore. Unfortunately, em-ployees who may have violated that trust are often allowed to evade the IGs inquiry by simply retiring from the government. So the bill empowers IGs to obtain testimony from employees like that. \n(Ms. AYOTTE assumed the Chair.) Similarly, the bill helps IGs better \nexpose waste, fraud, and abuse by those who receive Federal funds. It enables IGs to require testimony from govern-ment contractors, subcontractors, grantees, and subgrantees. Currently, most IGs can subpoena documents from entities from outside their agency. However, most cannot subpoena testi-mony, just documents—although there are a few agencies that can. For exam-ple, the inspector general for the De-fense Department and the Department of Health and Human Services already have that authority. The ability to re-quire witnesses outside the agency to \ntalk to the IG can be critical in car-rying out an inspector general’s statu-tory duties or recovering wasted Fed-eral funds. \nThe IG community recently provided \nme with numerous examples of actual, real-life cases that illustrate the need to subpoena witnesses. \nMadam President, I ask unanimous \nconsent to have printed in the R\nECORD \na document that lists these accounts. \nThere being no objection, the mate-\nrial was ordered to be printed in the R\nECORD , as follows: \nINSPECTORS GENERAL & TESTIMONIAL \nSUBPOENA AUTHORITY \nTHE USE OF TESTIMONIAL SUBPOENA AUTHORITY \nExamples of when Testimonial Subpoena \nAuthority Would Have Been Useful \nBelow are examples where subjects of IG \noversight could have been served with testi-monial subpoena’s by an Inspector General: \n1. Among a number of schemes identified \nduring a multiagency OIG investigation, Target owner of small businesses submitted overlapping small business proposals to two federal agencies and obtained funding for both projects, approximately $500,000 from each agency. During the course of the projects, the work funded by one of the agen-cies was falsely reported out in project re-ports to both agencies. National Science Foundation (NSF) OIG requested interviews with the Target owner and two of his com-pany’s employees, and they initially agreed through counsel to be interviewed. \nHowever, during the first of the interviews, \nan employee confessed to having destroyed company timesheets and created new com-pany time sheets in response to an IG sub-poena, and informed NSF OIG that he did so at the Target’s request. After that interview, the Target declined to be interviewed. In ad-dition, a fourth employee declined to be interviewed about his timesheets and work performed, which would have been relevant to the fraud scheme. NSF OIG’s inability to compel testimony negatively impacted our ability to pursue the obstruction and other potential charges against the Target and company employees. \n2. In a matter involving a very senior level \nSecurities and Exchange Commission (SEC) executive, instances of serious administra-tive misconduct were being investigated. During the pendency of the investigation, which had been declined criminally, the ex-ecutive resigned and refused to cooperate any further. As a result, the investigation was completed without all of the investiga-tive steps completed that would have indi-cated whether the misconduct was simply the result of a ‘‘bad actor,’’ or whether there are more systemic issues that should be ad-dressed by the agency. A testimonial sub-poena would ensure that the necessary inves-tigative steps could be completed. This is particularly important in an agency like the SEC where employees are able to leave rath-er quickly for private sector jobs (the prover-bial ‘‘revolving door’’). \n3. The Peace Corps awarded a $1.5 million \ncontract to a small business under the 8(a) Business Development Program, which is in-tended to provide eligible small disadvan-taged businesses additional opportunities to obtain certain government contracts. The 8(a) Program requires that eligible small businesses perform a significant portion of the contract; however, an investigation dis-closed that the small business did not com-ply with that requirement. Instead, the small business allowed a large subcontractor to perform nearly all of the work. Because \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.038 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8670 December 15, 2015 \nPeace Corps was not in a direct contractual \nrelationship with the subcontractor actually performing the work, OIG had no recourse to obtain statements of the subcontractor. \n4. During a criminal investigation con-\nducted by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) OIG of allegations in-volving a CPSC Assistant General Counsel representing a company obtain contracts to provide supplies to the DoD, records were ob-tained from the CPSC, Department of the Army, and DoD regarding several of the al-\nleged (accused eventually pled guilty to them) offenses. However, additional offenses could not be proven as CPSC OIG had no au-thority to require US based members of the foreign company to submit to interviews or provide testimonial information. CPSC OIG requested interviews with both senior man-agers and agents of the company in question, and although they initially agreed to be interviewed all later declined. \n5. During the course of a review conducted \nafter Fast & Furious, DOJ OIG wanted to interview a former U.S. Attorney in Arizona. When asked for a voluntary interview with the then retired U.S. Attorney declined. DOJ OIG had no way to reach the retired U.S. At-torney to elaborate on prior statements he had made. \n6. In a Farm Credit Administration OIG \ncase where a senior staff member retired dur-ing an investigation, it was subsequently dis-covered he/she had changed official docu-ments, impersonated an official and com-mitted libel and slander, before retiring dur-ing the middle of an investigation on other matters. The former government employee was not receptive to interview post retire-ment and due to his retirement from govern-ment service, there was no recourse. \n7. Peace Corps OIG, in the course of per-\nforming an audit of one of the largest agency contracts, discovered that an unauthorized subcontractor was performing the majority of the work under the contract. The contract was misidentified as a fixed-price contract, did not include an IG audit clause, and the subcontractor was not in a direct contrac-tual relationship with Peace Corps. Peace Corps OIG was hindered in examining poten-tially false or fraudulent billing by having to rely solely on documentary subpoenas. \n8. NSF OIG conducted an investigation of \ntwo professors, a husband and wife, who both served as Principal Investigators at a U.S. university and received grant funds from multiple federal agencies. The Targets also had full time tenured positions at a foreign university and used federal funds to travel to that foreign country, without disclosing their affiliation in either grant proposals or the U.S. university. During the investiga-tion, the Targets declined, through counsel, to be interviewed. The case was declined by the U.S. attorney’s office, and ultimately by the state attorney general’s office. NSF OIG’s inability to interview these Targets negatively affected NSF OIG’s ability to ob-tain all relevant evidence to effectively pur-sue grant fraud charges against the Targets. \n9. The Farm Credit Administration OIG \nwas advised of a contractor who was paid by the agency for contract services it had not provided. Attempts to contact a company representative by mail and telephone were not productive (telephone messages were not returned; certified mail not answered). For-tunately, OIG was able to prevail upon the FBI who had contacts with the company rep-resentative. Had the contractor not re-sponded to the FBI contacts, the OIG would have had little recourse in obtaining infor-mation from the contractor regarding recov-ery of the funds. There was a scarce amount of information regarding bank accounts to subpoena for financial records. A testimonial subpoena would have been instrumental under those circumstances. 10. In three other small business grant- \nfraud cases pursued by NSF OIG, three Tar-gets declined to be interviewed regarding ap-parent fraud schemes that had been identi-fied. Having testimonial subpoena would have provided an important tool to more ef-fectively pursue these cases. \ni. The first Target faked letters of support \nfor his proposals, applied for duplicate pro-posals to multiple federal agencies, listed his in-laws (over 90) as company employees, and paid for his wife’s business facility with fed-eral funds. Target declined to be inter-viewed, negatively affecting NSF OIG’s abil-ity to fully investigate the matter. \nii. The second Target provided financial re-\nports to NSF that did not match his com-pany’s expenditure ledger for the award and appeared to include personal expenditures. The Target initially agreed to be interviewed but canceled such interviews on multiple oc-casions, negatively affecting NSF OIG’s abil-ity to fully investigate the matter. \niii. The third Target made up a fake in-\nvestment company to support a matching award from the agency, and the individual who purportedly signed the investment let-ter as CFO did not sign the letter and never heard of the fake investment company. The Target initially agreed to be interviewed by NSF OIG, but terminated the interview early on after understanding the implications of the NSF OIG investigation. Since then, he has declined to even comply with a subpoena for documents. \nA CASE STUDY : DOD IG ’S USE OF TESTIMONIAL \nSUBPOENA AUTHORITY \nTestimonial subpoena authority, found at \n§8(i) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., was originally pro-vided by §1042 of the National Defense Au-thorization Act of 2010, 111 Pub. L. 84. \nTestimonial subpoena authority has never \nbeen delegated, but has always been re-tained/exercised personally by the DoD IG. \nInternal procedures mandate that before a \ntestimonial subpoena is issued: (1) the wit-ness, who cannot be a Federal employee, must have declined a voluntary interview, (2) the interview must be expected to produce information needed to resolve critical issue(s) or corroborate essential facts, and (3) the information sought cannot reasonably be obtained through any other means. \n§8(i)(3) of the IG Act requires the DoD IG \nnotify the Attorney General seven days be-fore issuing a testimonial subpoena. This no-tice requirement has not hindered the DoD IG’s use of its testimonial subpoena author-ity. \nTo date, since 2010, the DoD IG has consid-\nered a total of eight testimonial subpoena re-quests, all in connection with administrative investigations: \nTwo requests were considered but denied \nbecause they failed to meet the internal pro-cedures criteria. \nOne request, associated with the Retired \nMilitary Advisor (RMA) administrative re- investigation, was authorized by the DoD IG and served on the witness, a former Assist-ant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs. \nTwo requests, also associated with the \nRMA administrative re-investigation, were authorized by the DoD IG but not served on the witnesses, a former Secretary of Defense and a former DoD General Counsel, because the witnesses belatedly agreed to be inter-viewed voluntarily. \nOne request, associated with an internal \nadministrative review of a DCIS investiga-tion, was authorized by the DoD IG and served on the witness, a former DoD Deputy Inspector General for Investigations/ Acting Chief of Staff. \nOne request, associated with an Audit Pol-\nicy review of DCAA, was authorized by the DoD IG but not served on the witness, a \nformer DCAA Director, because the witness belatedly agreed to be interviewed volun-tarily. \nOne request, associated with an IPO eval-\nuation of the transfer of ITAR controlled technology by MDA to NASA, was author-ized by the DoD IG but not served on the wit-ness, a former NASA contractor, because the witness belatedly agreed to be interviewed. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I \nalso ask unanimous consent to have printed in the R\nECORD a letter I re-\nceived yesterday from the Project on Government Oversight. \nThere being no objection, the mate-\nrial was ordered to be printed in the R\nECORD , as follows: \nPOGO—P ROJECT ON \nGOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT , \nDecember 14, 2015. \nHon. C HUCK GRASSLEY , \nHart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Hon. C\nLAIRE MCCASKILL , \nHart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. \nD\nEAR SENATOR GRASSLEY AND SENATOR \nMCCASKILL : The Project On Government \nOversight (POGO) is a nonpartisan inde-pendent watchdog that champions good gov-ernment reforms. POGO’s investigations into corruption, misconduct, and conflicts of in-terest achieve a more effective, accountable, open, and ethical federal government. Recog-nizing the vital role that Inspectors General (IG) play, POGO has investigated and worked to improve the IG system since 2006. This work includes multiple reports on the IG system, maintaining an IG vacancy tracker, and working with Congress to incorporate needed reforms in the Inspector General Act of 2008. In light of this work, we are writing to thank you for introducing the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2015, and to urge Congress to quickly pass this important legislation. \nInspectors General can make all the dif-\nference when it comes to creating a better government, but Congress needs to ensure that IGs have access to all the information they need to do their job effectively. Federal agencies have begun to unreasonably chal-lenge IGs’ statutory right to access agency data in attempts to prevent embarrassing events from coming to light. It is essential that Congress act quickly to pass the Inspec-tor General Empowerment Act of 2015 to pre-vent the overbroad interpretation of restric-tions on IG authority from becoming accept-ed law, allowing current and future waste, fraud, and abuse to remain hidden. \nIn order to serve as the eyes and ears of \nCongress, an IG office must have an unre-stricted view of the agency it oversees. This principle is enshrined in Section 6(a)(1) of the Inspector General Act, which states that each IG office shall have ‘‘access to all records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other material . . . which relate to programs and operations with respect to which that Inspector General has responsibilities under this Act.’’ It seems crystal clear that ‘‘all’’ means all, but some agencies have fought back against that idea. \nThe most blatant rejection of ‘‘all means \nall’’ can be found in the July 2015 opinion by the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that improperly limits IG access and caters to agency resistance to necessary oversight. If left unchallenged, this opinion will allow agencies’ incorrect interpretation of Section 6(a)(1) to become de facto law. The OLC’s opinion states that the unfettered access afforded by Section \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.022 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8671 December 15, 2015 \n6(a) of the Inspector General Act is super-\nseded by specific restrictions on the dissemi-nation of Title III, grand jury, and FCRA in-formation. The OLC concluded, for instance, that the IG office may not be entitled to ob-tain these records when conducting financial audits and other administrative and civil re-views that are only tangentially related to DOJ’s criminal and law enforcement activi-ties. POGO disagrees with this interpreta-tion because it rests upon a clear misreading of the common language Congress made clear in the law. \nCongressional leaders on both sides of the \naisle have rightly condemned the OLC’s opinion, according to which ‘‘all records’’ does not mean ‘‘all records.’’ POGO believes this OLC opinion makes a mockery of the en-tire IG system: these offices cannot possibly be effective watchdogs on behalf of Congress and the American public if agencies restrict IG access and force them to negotiate with \nagency leaders for access on a case-by-case basis. Agency records provide the raw mate-rials IG offices need to fulfill their statutory responsibilities. The very purpose of having an independent IG is undermined if the office has to seek the agency’s permission in order to carry out its mission. Unless Congress acts quickly, this OLC opinion will gut the IG system and prevent meaningful oversight. \nWhile many federal agencies handle \nrecords that are highly sensitive and legiti-mately withheld from public dissemination, that does not mean they should be withheld from IG offices, or by extension from Con-gress, both of which offer independent over-sight and recommendations to improve agen-cy operations. Secret agency programs are particularly susceptible to waste, fraud, and abuse, but IG offices cannot uncover or cor-rect these problems without access to agency records. Agency actions that deny access to those records violate our system of checks and balances, and do so unduly, as IGs have proven they can responsibly handle sensitive information. \nFor example, the DOJ Office of the Inspec-\ntor General (OIG) has shown that it can ef-fectively and responsibly oversee the most sensitive DOJ operations without jeopard-izing law enforcement actions. It has re-viewed grand jury materials and other sen-sitive records when it examined the FBI’s po-tential targeting of domestic advocacy groups, the FBI’s efforts to access records of reporters’ toll calls during a media leak probe, the President’s Surveillance Program, and the firing of U.S. Attorneys, among other important and high-profile cases. \nCongress needs to clarify that IG offices \nmust be granted access to all agency records notwithstanding any other existing or future law or any other prohibition on disclosure, including but not limited to: 1) the federal rules of criminal procedure; 2) Title III; 3) the FCRA; and 4) laws such as the Kate Puzey Act that restrict the dissemination of personally identifiable information. In addi-tion, Congress should specify that agencies do not waive the attorney-client or other common law privileges when records are turned over to IG offices. The Inspector Gen-eral Empowerment Act of 2015 addresses this issue and corrects the troublesome OLC memo. However, until Congress passes the bill, that memo can be and has been used to block oversight. \nThe bill also addresses other improper \nchallenges to IG access. Under the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act (CMPPA), IGs must get approval from agen-cy leaders in order to match the computer records of one federal agency against other federal and non-federal records. The Inspec-tor General Empowerment Act of 2015 would exempt IG offices from the CMPPA so they can access records at other agencies without getting approval from the very officials they \nare supposed to oversee. Additionally, under current law, IGs can only compel testimony from federal employees. This means that former federal employees, contractors, or grant recipients can refuse to testify before an IG in the course of an investigation. This bill would provide IGs with testimonial sub-poena power over these individuals, and allow for fuller and more effective oversight of federal programs and agencies. \nIn the light of the erroneous July OLC \nopinion, it is urgent that Congress act now to make sure IGs have the ability to func-tion as intended. Not correcting this prece-dent now will cripple current and future IGs and in turn limit Congress’s and the public’s ability to oversee the executive branch and hold it accountable. \nSincerely, \nD\nANIELLE BRIAN, \nExecutive Director. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, \nthe Project on Government Oversight is a nonpartisan, independent watchdog that has been advocating good govern-ment reforms for decades. In this letter the Project on Government Oversight expresses its support for this bill in general and for provisions that equip inspectors general with the authority to require testimony. Let it be clear that the bill also imposes limitations on the authority of IGs to require tes-timony. \nThere are several procedural protec-\ntions in place to ensure that this au-thority is exercised wisely. For exam-ple, the subpoena must be approved by a designated panel of three other IGs. It is then referred to the Attorney Gen-eral. For those IGs who can already subpoena witnesses’ testimony, I am not aware of any instances in which it has been misused. In fact, the inspector general for the Department of Defense has established a policy that spells out additional procedures and safeguards to ensure the subjects of subpoenas are treated fairly. I am confident the rest of the IG community will be just as scrupulous in providing appropriate protection for the use of this author-ity. You see, we all win when inspec-tors general can do their jobs. Most im-portantly, the public is better served when IGs are able to shine light in the government operation and stewardship of taxpayer dollars. \nIn September we attempted to pass \nthis important bill by unanimous con-sent. It has been nearly 3 months since leadership asked whether any Senator would object. Not one Senator has put a statement in the R\nECORD or come to \nthe floor to object publicly. At the Au-gust Judiciary Committee hearing, there was a clear consensus that Con-gress needed to act legislatively and needed to overturn this Office of Legal Counsel opinion that one person out of 2-plus million employees in the execu-tive branch overruled this 1978 act that the inspector general ought to be enti-tled to all information. Every day that goes by without fixing the opinion of the Office of Legal Counsel is another day that watchdogs across government \ncan be stonewalled. \nAt that hearing, Senator L\nEAHY said \nthis access problem is ‘‘blocking what was once a free flow of information’’ \nand Senator L EAHY called for a perma-\nnent legislative solution. Senator C OR-\nNYN noted that the Office of Legal \nCounsel opinion is ‘‘ignoring the man-date of Congress’’ and undermining the oversight authority that Congress has under the Constitution. Senator T\nILLIS \nstated that the need to fix this access problem was ‘‘a blinding flash of the obvious’’ and that ‘‘we all seem to be in violent agreement that we need to cor-rect this.’’ \nHowever, some Members raised con-\ncern about guaranteeing IGs unchecked access to certain national security in-formation. Fortunately, we were able to agree on some changes to the bill that addressed those concerns, without gutting the core of the bill. We made these concessions so the bill can pass by unanimous consent. This Senator thanks my colleagues who worked with me to arrive at this compromise. \nAs we move forward, it is important \nto note the following: First, I am not aware of a single instance in which an IG has mishandled any classified or sensitive operational information. IGs are subject to the same restrictions on disclosing information as everyone else in the agency they oversee. \nSecond, the Executive orders re-\nstricting and controlling classified in-formation are issued under the Presi-dent’s constitutional authority. Natu-rally, this bill does not attempt to limit that constitutional authority at all. It just clarifies that no law can prevent an IG from obtaining docu-ments from the agency it oversees un-less the statute explicitly states that IG access should be restricted. No one thinks this statute could supersede the President’s constitutional authority. \nThird, there is already a provision in \nlaw that allows the Secretary of De-fense to prohibit an Inspector General review to protect vital national secu-rity interests and to protect sensitive operational information. We agreed to clarify that already existing provision to include the ability to restrict access to information as well as to prevent a review from occurring. However, we kept the language in that provision that requires notification to Congress whenever that authority to restrict an IG’s access to information is exercised. \nAfter making these changes, we at-\ntempted to hotline the revised bill last week. Since then, no Senator has pub-licly stated any other concerns. The cosponsors have worked hard behind the scenes over the past 3 months in good faith to accommodate the con-cerns of any and all Members willing to work with us. Now the time has come to pass this bill. We all lose when In-spectors General are delayed or pre-vented from doing their work. \nI urge my colleagues to stand up for \nInspectors General, overturn the Office of Legal Counsel opinion, and restore the intent of the Inspector General Act. All IGs should have access and timely independent access to all agen-cy records. The most important thing \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.023 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8672 December 15, 2015 \nis the principle that not one lawyer— \nthat any one lawyer in the Department of Justice or any agency of government doesn’t have a right to override the opinion of the Congress expressed in a statute so clearly as this is expressed. \nMadam President, at this time I ask \nunanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consider-ation of Calendar No. 68, S. 579, the In-spector General Empowerment Act of 2015; I further ask consent that the Johnson substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there \nobjection? \nMr. REID. Objection. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objec-\ntion is heard. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Will the Senator \nyield for a question? \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from Iowa has the floor. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, \nwill the Senator yield for a question? \nMr. REID. Yes. Mr. GRASSLEY. May I ask on whose \nbehalf the minority leader is objecting? Is it on his own behalf or on behalf of another Senator? \nMr. REID. Other Senators are con-\ncerned about it, and I made the objec-tion on my behalf. \nMr. GRASSLEY. I will not question \nwhat the minority leader just said, but it seems to me we ought to know who that Senator is besides the minority leader because Senator W\nYDEN and I \nhave worked very hard over the last 10 years, and we finally got done what we thought was a very good measure for this body; that the people who put holds on legislation ought to be made public, and there has been nothing in the R\nECORD . So why don’t these people \nhave guts enough to put in the R ECORD \ntheir reasons and who they are? The public has a right to know that. \nMr. REID. I am it. Mr. JOHNSON. Will the Senator \nyield for a question? \nMr. REID. No. Mr. JOHNSON addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nator from Wisconsin. \nMr. JOHNSON. Madam President, I \nwant to rise and voice my disappoint-ment. This is a very commonsense piece of legislation that has strong bi-partisan support. Senator G\nRASSLEY \nhas worked tirelessly on this and cer-tainly our committee has as well. We cannot get a simple, commonsense bi-partisan piece of legislation passed by the Senate—and then the insult of not even hearing what the objection is. \nWhat is the objection to giving the \ninspectors general the tools they need to provide the accountability and the transparency to safeguard American taxpayer money? \nI cited my example of the Potomac \nHealthcare system, the Potomac VA health care system, where because an inspector general was not transparent because the VA inspector general held \n140 reports on inspections and inves-tigations, the family of Thomas Baer did not realize there were problems. They took their father to that health care facility and their father died of a stroke because of neglect. That is how important this is. Yet we cannot even hear the reason behind the objection as to why they would not allow this very commonsense piece of legislation to pass. \nThis is very disappointing. With that, I yield the floor. Mr. GRASSLEY. I suggest the ab-\nsence of a quorum. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. \nG\nARDNER ). The clerk will call the roll. \nThe senior assistant legislative clerk \nproceeded to call the roll. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I \nhave a unanimous consent request. \nf \nEXTENSION OF MORNING \nBUSINESS \nMr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that morning busi-ness be extended until 6 p.m. today. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nMr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I \nsuggest the absence of a quorum. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe senior assistant legislative clerk \nproceeded to call the roll. \nMr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nNUCLEAR AGREEMENT WITH IRAN \nMr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I rise \ntoday to revisit an issue that some in this body I am sure, no doubt, would probably not want to revisit. My inten-tion is not to cause any of my col-leagues discomfort, but this is an issue—and the Presiding Officer knows more than most—that needs to be dis-cussed, and the Presiding Officer has done a great job of discussing it. I think it has become pretty clear to most Americans and many Members of this body that this body made a mis-take a few months back, a mistake with significant consequences for our security, for the security of the Middle East, and certainly a mistake as it re-lates to some of our own American citi-zens. For the first time in U.S. history on a national security agreement of major importance, the mistake that was made was the Congress of the United States moved forward to ap-prove an agreement not on the basis of a bipartisan majority, which is the his-tory of this country, but on the basis of a partisan minority in both Houses. Of course, I am talking about President Obama’s Iranian nuclear deal that will \nvery soon—as early as next month, ac-cording to the terms of the agree-ment—be sending tens of billions of dollars to the biggest sponsor of ter-rorism in the world. \nThere are many things that are going \non in this body right now. We are look-ing at the spending bills, and there is a lot of concern about terrorism. As a matter of fact, polling is showing that right now terrorism is ranking as the highest concern for Americans—higher even than the economy—given the at-tacks in California and what is hap-pening with ISIS. \nAmidst all of these challenges, how-\never, the implementation of the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran is looming on the horizon and is not being talked about enough in this body. It is critical that we keep our eye on Iran—still the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism—particularly now. Why is it so critical now? Because, as I noted, as early as next month, in Janu-ary, tens of billions of dollars of sanc-tions relief will be pouring into the country of Iran according to the terms of the agreement. \nI commend my colleague from New \nJersey, Senator M\nENENDEZ . I was pre-\nsiding last week in the Senate, and once again he gave another out-standing speech on American foreign policy, on American national security, on what is going on with Iran, what is going on with their activities desta-bilizing the Middle East, what is going on with their activities which are as we speak violating the Iran U.N. Security Council resolutions. \nYes, I know we debated this issue for \na long time on the Senate floor, and I am sure some of my colleagues who voted on this deal are done and they don’t want to talk about it anymore. \nMr. President, if you recall, one of \nthe arguments to support this deal, one of the arguments the President was making was that—we were told this deal would change Iran’s behavior. President Obama stated that the deal ‘‘demonstrates that if Iran complies with its international obligations, then it can fully rejoin the community of nations.’’ The words of the text of the agreement even state that the United States is ‘‘expressing its desire to build a new relationship with Iran.’’ And, of course, Secretary Kerry, in hearings and in private briefings with the Sen-ate, noted that he thought—and you saw his actions—that the agreement would establish a much more positive and constructive relationship between Iran and the United States. So that was one of the arguments for the deal we voted on. How is that working out? Well, I think we have gotten a new re-lationship with Iran, all right, but it is worse than the old one. \nSince the signing of the Iranian deal, \nIran has taken deliberative steps, de-finitive steps that continue to under-mine the security interests of the United States and our allies and those of our citizens in almost every region, \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.042 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8673 December 15, 2015 \nin almost every realm. Every action \nthe Iranians have taken has seemed to want to increase tension between us, Iran, and some of our allies. \nI wish to provide some examples. Al-\nmost as soon as the ink was dry on this agreement, the Iran regime and its leaders continued doing what they typically do: chanting ‘‘Death to Amer-ica.’’ And more specifically, the Aya-tollah Khamenei predicted that the Zi-onist regime—of course he is referring to Israel—will be ‘‘nothing’’ in 25 years. It is another one of his ref-erences to wiping Israel off the map— after the agreement. Then he stated, of the 25-year period, ‘‘Until then, strug-gling, heroic, and jihadi morale will leave no moment of serenity for the Zi-onists.’’ That is the leader of the coun-try we did this deal with—after we signed the agreement. So it is still cer-tainly provocative in that regard. \nHow about its funding of Hezbollah, \none of its terrorist proxies around the world? It is still full speed ahead. There are estimates of up to $200 million a year. That continues after the signing. \nHow about abiding by U.N. Security \nCouncil resolutions, such as the one that prevents the Quds Force com-mander, General Soleimani, from trav-eling? Well, we know that was violated. As a matter of fact, Soleimani went to Moscow to meet with Putin to discuss arms transfers, likely in violation of the U.N. Security Council resolution— the resolution that bans conventional weapons from being imported to Iran. So that was another violation, and they are likely planning another one. \nLet me remind this body about the \nQuds Force commander. This is what former U.S. Army Chief of Staff GEN Ray Odierno said about him: \nQassem Soleimani is the one who has been \nexporting malign activities throughout the Middle East for some time now. He’s abso-lutely responsible for killing many Ameri-cans. In fact, I would say the last two years I was there the majority of our casualties came from his surrogates, not Sunni or al Qaeda. \nThis is the person who is negotiating \nwith Putin to trade arms—likely in violation of another U.N. Security Council resolution. \nWhat about his troops? Well, we have \nseen an increase of Iranian troops in Syria. General Dunford, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, predicted that there are about 2,000 troops in Syria helping to lead the fight to save Assad and working with the Russians to do that. \nHow about Iran’s compliance with \nU.N. Security Council Resolution 1929, which bans its ballistic missile pro-gram? Remember that issue? We de-bated that issue on the floor. General Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said that under no cir-cumstances should we agree to lifting that ban, but we did in the deal. Now we are learning that Iran has tested not one but two ballistic missiles on October 11 and November 21 in likely— almost certain—violation of U.N. Secu-rity Council Resolution 1929. In my \nview, that is a violation of the Iran agreement. \nThis is what our Ambassador to the \nU.N. stated. She said that the missiles Iran tested only months after we passed the agreement are ‘‘inherently capable of delivering a nuclear weap-on.’’ So they are testing missiles with that capability. This should concern all Americans. What should really concern all Americans right now is that despite Ambassador Power’s statement, it ap-pears the Obama administration is looking to do nothing on this violation of the U.N. Security Council resolu-tion. \nThis is how my colleague from Ten-\nnessee, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, B\nOBCORKER , put \nit: \nIran violates U.N. Security Council resolu-\ntions because it knows neither this adminis-tration nor the U.N. Security Council is like-ly to take any action. Instead, the adminis-tration remains paralyzed and responds to Iran’s violations with empty words, with condemnation, and concern. \nAs I mentioned, last week my col-\nleague from New Jersey, Senator M\nENENDEZ , gave an outstanding speech \non this issue on December 8, and he noted—similar to Senator C\nORKER — \nthat the Obama administration’s reac-tion has been muted, almost one of si-lence. \nMr. President, there is more. A re-\nport from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which we were all an-ticipating, just recently came out and stated that Iran pursued nuclear weap-ons in secret until 2009—longer than previously believed. So the country we are doing this deal with, at least ac-cording to the IAEA, has been lying to the world. \nIran has been caught lying and cheat-\ning. It is testing ballistic missiles against the U.N. Security Council Res-olution 1929 and others; it is still fund-ing global terrorism; it is sending thou-sands of troops to Syria to prop up Assad; it has sent the man with the blood of thousands of American sol-diers on his hands to Russia to talk about arms trading, in likely further violation of U.N. Security Council reso-lutions; and, of course, it is still chant-ing ‘‘Death to America’’ and talking about wiping Israel off the face of the Earth—all since the Obama adminis-tration signed the Iranian nuclear agreement. \nThere is one more outrage, perhaps \nthe worst one, in my view. In a direct affront to the United States and our citizens, Iran is still holding five Amer-icans against their will in that coun-try. Think about that. Many of us who closely watched the negotiations thought surely, surely Secretary Kerry—who had enormous leverage; the entire world was aligned against Iran—would surely use that leverage to get our citizens free, or maybe if he wasn’t going to do it as part of the deal, there would be some kind of side agreement after the signing that they would be quietly released. But, like ev-\nerything else since the signing of this agreement, the American hostage situ-ation in Iran has actually gotten worse. \nI wish to read the names and describe \na little bit about the Americans who are currently being held in Iran. \nAmir Hekmati of Michigan, a U.S. \nmarine, was detained in Iran in 2011 while visiting Iranian relatives and was sentenced to 10 years in prison for espi-onage—a U.S. marine who proudly served his country. I am a marine. We don’t leave our fellow marines on the \nbattlefield, but evidently the Obama administration has not learned that lesson. \nSaeed Abedini of Idaho, a Christian \npastor, was detained in Iran in 2012 and sentenced to 8 years in prison on charges related to his religious beliefs. Again, an American is languishing in Iranian jail right now, a pastor. \nRobert Levinson of Florida, a former \nofficial of the FBI, disappeared in 2007. Iran’s leaders denied knowledge of Levinson’s whereabouts or any involve-ment in his disappearance. \nMost recently, Siamak Namazi, a \nDubai-based businessman, was arrested after the signing of this Iranian nu-clear deal—after the signing—was ar-rested by the Iranian Government while visiting relatives in Iran. Right now, any charges against him are un-known. That happened on October 15. \nOf course, Jason Rezaian of Cali-\nfornia—a journalist for the Washington Post, who was credentialed as a jour-nalist by the Government of Iran—has been detained for over 500 days and re-cently—again, after the signing of the agreement with President Obama—was sentenced to an undisclosed prison for an undisclosed term for espionage. \nThat is five Americans right now. I \ndon’t have to remind my colleagues that it is the holiday season. It is a time for families and loved ones to come together, to be with each other. But what about the families of these Americans? Who is thinking about them? \nSecretary Kerry and President \nObama should be on the phone every day working for their release, but that is clearly not happening. As the Wash-ington Post editorial board put it re-cently: \nIran appears content to allow Mr. Rezaian \nand the other Americans to rot in prison in-definitely, even as the regime collects more than $100 billion in sanctions relief and is granted the role it has long sought as a re-gional power. That should not be an accept-able outcome. \nThat is the Washington Post. That is \nthe Washington Post editorial—‘‘That should not be an acceptable outcome.’’ No, it shouldn’t. It should not. \nAll of this begs some very obvious \nquestions. Given Iran’s consistent pro-vocative actions against U.S. interests and our citizens since the signing of the Iran deal and given that one of the promises of the deal—better relations with Iran, more constructive behavior from Iran—has proven to be utterly \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:01 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.043 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8674 December 15, 2015 \nfalse, why in the world are we moving \nfull steam ahead with the lifting of sanctions as early as next month? Think about that. Why indeed are we \ngetting ready to release tens of billions of dollars to the world’s biggest spon-sor of state terrorism when we know the additional money will only em-bolden Iran? Just think how they are acting now. When they have tens of bil-lions of dollars to further their ter-rorist activities, it will embolden them to act in even more nefarious ways against our interests and those of our allies and, most importantly, those of American citizens. \nAnother question: Why aren’t the \nPresident and Secretary Kerry at a minimum telling the Iranians they won’t see one dime—one dime—of the billions and billions of dollars we are set to hand over to the Iranians until all five Americans are released from prison? Why aren’t we using that lever-age? That leverage is going to go away as soon as we release that money. \nWhy are we getting ready to release \ntens of billions of dollars to Iran when it is clear they are going to simply vio-late this agreement? That is not just my view. Former Senator and Sec-retary of State Hillary Clinton was quoted as saying just last week that it is not if, but when, Iran will violate President Obama’s nuclear agreement. \nJust last week she stated: ‘‘They are \ngoing to violate it.’’ Former Senator, former Secretary of State Hillary Clin-ton knows a little about the issue. She helped negotiate it. ‘‘They are going to violate it,’’ she said. ‘‘They are going to violate it, they are going to be pro-vocative about it, and we need to re-spond quickly and very harshly.’’ That is the former Secretary of State. \nWell, I agree with the former Sec-\nretary of State—the Iranians are going to violate this agreement. In fact, it is very likely the Iranians have already violated this agreement with their U.N. Security Council resolution violations. \nSo what should we do? First, for any Americans listening, \nwatching, who care about this issue, I urge you to call the President, call the Secretary of State, call the White House, call the State Department. Tell them something that I believe the vast, vast majority of Americans agree with: Our government should not be reliev-ing Iran of any sanctions while it con-tinues to illegally hold five Americans hostage. We should demand of our President that he should not allow tens of billions of dollars to flood into the biggest terrorist regime in the world while our citizens languish in Iranian jails. This is simple, and it is just wrong. \nWe need to light up the switchboard. \nLet President Obama know. Here is the number to the White House switch-board: (202) 456–1414. Call the President and tell him you think it is fundamen-tally wrong to let five Americans lan-guish in prison while we are getting ready to send the biggest terrorist re-gime in the world tens of billions of dollars. Call John Kerry. Here is the number \nto the State Department switchboard: (202) 647–4000. Tell him: Mr. Secretary, get on the phone. Release these pris-oners; release our citizens or don’t give Iran any of the billions of dollars they think they are going to get next month. \nSecond, I agreed with my colleague \nSenator M\nENENDEZ when he gave his \nspeech last week that we need to keep the leverage against Iran by tightening the full range of sanctions available to us to penalize Iran for violating U.N. Security Council resolutions, as they have done within the last month. In his speech he also said we need to reau-thorize the Iran Sanctions Act. I agree with him, and this body should take action to do just that. \nFinally, I am working to get support \nfor a simple bill that would prevent the President from lifting sanctions until Iran is no longer designated a state sponsor of terrorism and until Iran re-leases our five citizens who are lan-guishing in their jails. \nWith all due respect to my colleagues \nwho voted for this agreement, I believe this body made an enormous mistake by allowing the President’s nuclear agreement to move forward. Iran’s ac-tions since the signing of this agree-ment—day after day, against the inter-ests of the United States and our citi-zens—have made this 100 percent clear. \nThis mistake can be undone. We \ndon’t have to allow Iran access to tens of billions of dollars in sanctions relief while they continue to destabilize the Middle East, while they continue their robust expansive terrorist activities throughout the world. And we cer-tainly—and this is a message for the President of the United States and the Secretary of State. We certainly don’t have to allow them the tens of billions of dollars while Iran retains and de-tains Americans on trumped-up charges in Iranian jails, with no pros-pect for release. As the Washington Post put it, ‘‘That should not be an ac-ceptable outcome.’’ \nMr. President, I yield the floor. \nf \nEXTENSION OF MORNING \nBUSINESS \nMr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. \nH\nOEVEN ). Without objection, it is so or-\ndered. \nf \nPILOT’S BILL OF RIGHTS 2 \nMr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask \nunanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consider-ation of Calendar No. 319, S. 571. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will report the bill by title. \nThe bill clerk read as follows: \nA bill (S. 571) to amend the Pilot’s Bill of \nRights to facilitate appeals and to apply to other certificates issued by the Federal Avia-\ntion Administration, to require the revision of the third class medical certification regu-lations issued by the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration, and for other purposes. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there \nobjection to proceeding to the meas-ure? \nThe Senator from Connecticut. Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, \nreserving the right to object, I have worked hard, and I—— \nMr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield \nfor one question? \nMr. BLUMENTHAL. Certainly, I will \nyield. \nMr. INHOFE. This is the request to \nmove to the calendar number, and the next request would be for the consider-ation. \nMr. BLUMENTHAL. Then I will be \nhappy to yield at this point. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there \nobjection to proceeding to the meas-ure? \nThere being no objection, the Senate \nproceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor-tation, with an amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following: \nSECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. \nThis Act may be cited as ‘‘Pilot’s Bill of \nRights 2’’. \nSEC. 2. MEDICAL CERTIFICATION OF CERTAIN \nSMALL AIRCRAFT PILOTS. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Not later than 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Ad-ministrator of the Federal Aviation Administra-tion shall issue or revise regulations to ensure that an individual may operate as pilot in com-mand of a covered aircraft if— \n(1) the individual possesses a valid driver’s li-\ncense issued by a State, territory, or possession of the United States and complies with all med-ical requirements or restrictions associated with that license; \n(2) the individual holds a medical certificate \nissued by the Federal Aviation Administration on the date of enactment of this Act, held such a certificate at any point during the 10-year pe-riod preceding such date of enactment, or ob-tains such a certificate after such date of enact-ment; \n(3) the most recent medical certificate issued \nby the Federal Aviation Administration to the individual— \n(A) indicates whether the certificate is first, \nsecond, or third class; \n(B) may include authorization for special \nissuance; \n(C) may be expired; (D) cannot have been revoked or suspended; \nand \n(E) cannot have been withdrawn; (4) the most recent application for airman \nmedical certification submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration by the individual can-not have been completed and denied; \n(5) the individual has completed a medical \neducation course described in subsection (c) dur-ing the 24 calendar months before acting as pilot in command of a covered aircraft and dem-onstrates proof of completion of the course; \n(6) the individual, when serving as a pilot in \ncommand, is under the care and treatment of a physician if the individual has been diagnosed with any medical condition that may impact the ability of the individual to fly; \n(7) the individual has received a comprehen-\nsive medical examination from a State-licensed physician during the previous 48 months and— \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 6333 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.045 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8675 December 15, 2015 \n(A) prior to the examination, the individual— \n(i) completed the individual’s section of the \nchecklist described in subsection (b); and \n(ii) provided the completed checklist to the \nphysician performing the examination; and \n(B) the physician conducted the comprehen-\nsive medical examination in accordance with the checklist described in subsection (b), checking each item specified during the examination and addressing, as medically appropriate, every medical condition listed, and any medications the individual is taking; and \n(8) the individual is operating in accordance \nwith the following conditions: \n(A) The covered aircraft is carrying not more \nthan 5 passengers. \n(B) The individual is operating the covered \naircraft under visual flight rules or instrument flight rules. \n(C) The flight, including each portion of that \nflight, is not carried out— \n(i) for compensation or hire, including that no \npassenger or property on the flight is being car-ried for compensation or hire; \n(ii) at an altitude that is more than 18,000 feet \nabove mean sea level; \n(iii) outside the United States, unless author-\nized by the country in which the flight is con-ducted; or \n(iv) at an indicated air speed exceeding 250 \nknots. \n(b) C\nOMPREHENSIVE MEDICAL EXAMINATION .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—Not later than 180 days after \nthe date of enactment of this Act, the Adminis-trator shall develop a checklist for an individual to complete and provide to the physician per-forming the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7). \n(2) R\nEQUIREMENTS .—The checklist shall con-\ntain— \n(A) a section, for the individual to complete \nthat contains— \n(i) boxes 3 through 13 and boxes 16 through 19 \nof the Federal Aviation Administration Form 8500-8 (3-99); \n(ii) a signature line for the individual to af-\nfirm that— \n(I) the answers provided by the individual on \nthat checklist, including the individual’s an-swers regarding medical history, are true and complete; \n(II) the individual understands that he or she \nis prohibited under Federal Aviation Adminis-tration regulations from acting as pilot in com-mand, or any other capacity as a required flight crew member, if he or she knows or has reason to know of any medical deficiency or medically disqualifying condition that would make the in-dividual unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner; and \n(III) the individual is aware of the regulations \npertaining to the prohibition on operations dur-ing medical deficiency and has no medically dis-qualifying conditions in accordance with appli-cable law; \n(B) a section with instructions for the indi-\nvidual to provide the completed checklist to the physician performing the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7); and \n(C) a section, for the physician to complete, \nthat instructs the physician— \n(i) to perform a clinical examination of— (I) head, face, neck, and scalp; (II) nose, sinuses, mouth, and throat; (III) ears, general (internal and external ca-\nnals), and eardrums (perforation); \n(IV) eyes (general), ophthalmoscopic, pupils \n(equality and reaction), and ocular motility (as-sociated parallel movement, nystagmus); \n(V) lungs and chest (not including breast ex-\namination); \n(VI) heart (precordial activity, rhythm, \nsounds, and murmurs); \n(VII) vascular system (pulse, amplitude, and \ncharacter, and arms, legs, and others); \n(VIII) abdomen and viscera (including her-\nnia); \n(IX) anus (not including digital examination); (X) skin; \n(XI) G-U system (not including pelvic exam-\nination); \n(XII) upper and lower extremities (strength \nand range of motion); \n(XIII) spine and other musculoskeletal; (XIV) identifying body marks, scars, and tat-\ntoos (size and location); \n(XV) lymphatics; (XVI) neurologic (tendon reflexes, equi-\nlibrium, senses, cranial nerves, and coordina-tion, etc.); \n(XVII) psychiatric (appearance, behavior, \nmood, communication, and memory); \n(XVIII) general systemic; (XIX) hearing; (XX) vision (distant, near, and intermediate \nvision, field of vision, color vision, and ocular alignment); \n(XXI) blood pressure and pulse; and (XXII) anything else the physician, in his or \nher medical judgment, considers necessary; \n(ii) to exercise medical discretion to address, \nas medically appropriate, any medical condi-tions identified, and to exercise medical discre-tion in determining whether any medical tests are warranted as part of the comprehensive medical examination; \n(iii) to discuss all drugs the individual reports \ntaking (prescription and nonprescription) and their potential to interfere with the safe oper-ation of an aircraft or motor vehicle; \n(iv) to sign the checklist, stating: ‘‘I certify \nthat I discussed all items on this checklist with the individual during my examination, dis-cussed any medications the individual is taking that could interfere with their ability to safely operate an aircraft or motor vehicle, and per-formed an examination that included all of the items on this checklist.’’; and \n(v) to provide the date the comprehensive med-\nical examination was completed, and the physi-cian’s full name, address, telephone number, and State medical license number. \n(3) L\nOGBOOK .—The completed checklist shall \nbe retained in the individual’s logbook and made available on request. \n(c) M\nEDICAL EDUCATION COURSE REQUIRE -\nMENTS .—The medical education course described \nin this subsection shall— \n(1) be available on the Internet free of charge; (2) be developed and periodically updated in \ncoordination with representatives of relevant nonprofit and not-for-profit general aviation stakeholder groups; \n(3) educate pilots on conducting medical self- \nassessments; \n(4) advise pilots on identifying warning signs \nof potential serious medical conditions; \n(5) identify risk mitigation strategies for med-\nical conditions; \n(6) increase awareness of the impacts of po-\ntentially impairing over-the-counter and pre-scription drug medications; \n(7) encourage regular medical examinations \nand consultations with primary care physicians; \n(8) inform pilots of the regulations pertaining \nto the prohibition on operations during medical deficiency and medically disqualifying condi-tions; \n(9) provide the checklist developed by the Fed-\neral Aviation Administration in accordance with subsection (b); and \n(10) upon successful completion of the course, \nelectronically provide to the individual and transmit to the Federal Aviation Administra-tion— \n(A) a certification of completion of the medical \neducation course, which shall be printed and re-tained in the individual’s logbook and made available upon request, and shall contain the individual’s name, address, and airman certifi-cate number; \n(B) subject to subsection (d), a release author-\nizing the National Driver Register through a designated State Department of Motor Vehicles to furnish to the Federal Aviation Administra-tion information pertaining to the individual’s driving record; (C) a certification by the individual that the \nindividual is under the care and treatment of a physician if the individual has been diagnosed with any medical condition that may impact the ability of the individual to fly, as required under (a)(6); \n(D) a form that includes— (i) the name, address, telephone number, and \nairman certificate number of the individual; \n(ii) the name, address, telephone number, and \nState medical license number of the physician performing the comprehensive medical examina-tion required in subsection (a)(7); \n(iii) the date of the comprehensive medical ex-\namination required in subsection (a)(7); and \n(iv) a certification by the individual that the \nchecklist described in subsection (b) was fol-lowed in the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7); and \n(E) a statement, which shall be printed, and \nsigned by the individual certifying that the indi-vidual understands the existing prohibition on operations during medical deficiency by stating: ‘‘I understand that I cannot act as pilot in com-mand, or any other capacity as a required flight crew member, if I know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make me unable to operate the aircraft in a safe man-ner.’’. \n(d) N\nATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER .—The author-\nization under subsection (c)(10)(B) shall be an authorization for a single access to the informa-tion contained in the National Driver Register. \n(e) S\nPECIAL ISSUANCE PROCESS .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—An individual who has \nqualified for the third-class medical certificate exemption under subsection (a) and is seeking to serve as a pilot in command of a covered aircraft shall be required to have completed the process for obtaining an Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate for each of the following: \n(A) A mental health disorder, limited to an es-\ntablished medical history or clinical diagnosis of— \n(i) personality disorder that is severe enough \nto have repeatedly manifested itself by overt acts; \n(ii) psychosis, defined as a case in which an \nindividual— \n(I) has manifested delusions, hallucinations, \ngrossly bizarre or disorganized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of psy-chosis; or \n(II) may reasonably be expected to manifest \ndelusions, hallucinations, grossly bizarre or dis-organized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of psychosis; \n(iii) bipolar disorder; or (iv) substance dependence within the previous \n2 years, as defined in section 67.307(a)(4) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. \n(B) A neurological disorder, limited to an es-\ntablished medical history or clinical diagnosis of any of the following: \n(i) Epilepsy. (ii) Disturbance of consciousness without sat-\nisfactory medical explanation of the cause. \n(iii) A transient loss of control of nervous sys-\ntem functions without satisfactory medical ex-planation of the cause. \n(C) A cardiovascular condition, limited to a \none-time special issuance for each diagnosis of the following: \n(i) Myocardial infraction. (ii) Coronary heart disease that has required \ntreatment. \n(iii) Cardiac valve replacement. (iv) Heart replacement. (2) S\nPECIAL RULE FOR CARDIOVASCULAR CONDI -\nTIONS .—In the case of an individual with a car-\ndiovascular condition, the process for obtaining an Authorization for Special Issuance of a Med-ical Certificate shall be satisfied with the suc-cessful completion of an appropriate clinical evaluation without a mandatory wait period. \n(3) S\nPECIAL RULE FOR MENTAL HEALTH CONDI -\nTIONS .— \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 6333 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.021 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8676 December 15, 2015 \n(A) In the case of an individual with a clini-\ncally diagnosed mental health condition, the third-class medical certificate exemption under subsection (a) shall not apply if— \n(i) in the judgment of the individual’s State- \nlicensed medical specialist, the condition— \n(I) renders the individual unable to safely per-\nform the duties or exercise the airman privileges described in subsection (a)(8); or \n(II) may reasonably be expected to make the \nindividual unable to perform the duties or exer-cise the privileges described in subsection (a)(8); or \n(ii) the individual’s driver’s license is revoked \nby the issuing agency as a result of a clinically diagnosed mental health condition. \n(B) Subject to subparagraph (A), an indi-\nvidual clinically diagnosed with a mental health condition shall certify every 2 years, in conjunc-tion with the certification under subsection (c)(10)(C), that the individual is under the care of a State-licensed medical specialist for that mental health condition. \n(4) S\nPECIAL RULE FOR NEUROLOGICAL CONDI -\nTIONS .— \n(A) In the case of an individual with a clini-\ncally diagnosed neurological condition, the third-class medical certificate exemption under subsection (a) shall not apply if— \n(i) in the judgment of the individual’s State- \nlicensed medical specialist, the condition— \n(I) renders the individual unable to safely per-\nform the duties or exercise the airman privileges described in subsection (a)(8); or \n(II) may reasonably be expected to make the \nindividual unable to perform the duties or exer-cise the privileges described in subsection (a)(8); or \n(ii) the individual’s driver’s license is revoked \nby the issuing agency as a result of a clinically diagnosed neurological condition. \n(B) Subject to subparagraph (A), an indi-\nvidual clinically diagnosed with a neurological condition shall certify every 2 years, in conjunc-tion with the certification under subsection (c)(10)(C), that the individual is under the care of a State-licensed medical specialist for that neurological condition. \n(f) I\nDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL MEDICAL \nCONDITIONS FOR THE CACI P ROGRAM .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—Not later than 180 days after \nthe date of enactment of this Act, the Adminis-trator shall review and identify additional med-ical conditions that could be added to the pro-gram known as the Conditions AMEs Can Issue (CACI) program. \n(2) C\nONSULTATIONS .—In carrying out para-\ngraph (1), the Administrator shall consult with aviation, medical, and union stakeholders. \n(3) R\nEPORT REQUIRED .—Not later than 180 \ndays after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representa-tives a report listing the medical conditions that have been added to the CACI program under paragraph (1). \n(g) E\nXPEDITED AUTHORIZATION FOR SPECIAL \nISSUANCE OF A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator shall im-\nplement procedures to expedite the process for obtaining an Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate under section 67.401 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. \n(2) C\nONSULTATIONS .—In carrying out para-\ngraph (1), the Administrator shall consult with aviation, medical, and union stakeholders. \n(3) R\nEPORT REQUIRED .—Not later than 1 year \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Ad-ministrator shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representa-tives a report describing how the procedures im-plemented under paragraph (1) will streamline the process for obtaining an Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate and re-duce the amount of time needed to review and \ndecide special issuance cases. \n(h) R\nEPORT REQUIRED .—Not later than 5 \nyears after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in coordination with the Na-tional Transportation Safety Board, shall sub-mit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report that describes the effect of the regulations issued or revised under subsection (a) and includes statistics with respect to changes in small aircraft activity and safety incidents. \n(i) P\nROHIBITION ON ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS .— \nBeginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator may not take an enforcement action for not holding a valid third-class medical certificate against a pilot of a covered aircraft for a flight, through a good faith effort, if the pilot and the flight meet the applicable requirements under subsection (a), except paragraph (5), unless the Administrator has published final regulations in the Federal Register under that subsection. \n(j) C\nOVERED AIRCRAFT DEFINED .—In this sec-\ntion, the term ‘‘covered aircraft’’ means an air-craft that— \n(1) is authorized under Federal law to carry \nnot more than 6 occupants; and \n(2) has a maximum certificated takeoff weight \nof not more than 6,000 pounds. \n(k) O\nPERATIONS COVERED .—The provisions \nand requirements covered in this section do not apply to pilots who elect to operate under the medical requirements under subsection (b) or subsection (c) of section 61.23 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. \nSEC. 3. EXPANSION OF PILOT’S BILL OF RIGHTS. \n(a) A PPEALS OF SUSPENDED AND REVOKED AIR-\nMAN CERTIFICATES .—Section 2(d)(1) of the Pi-\nlot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is amended by striking ‘‘or imposing a punitive civil action or an emergency order of revocation under sub-sections (d) and (e) of section 44709 of such title’’ and inserting ‘‘suspending or revoking an airman certificate under section 44709(d) of such title, or imposing an emergency order of revoca-tion under subsections (d) and (e) of section 44709 of such title’’. \n(b) D\nENOVO REVIEW BY DISTRICT COURT ; \nBURDEN OF PROOF .—Section 2(e) of the Pilot’s \nBill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is amended— \n(1) by amending paragraph (1) to read as fol-\nlows: \n‘‘(1) I\nN GENERAL .—In an appeal filed under \nsubsection (d) in a United States district court with respect to a denial, suspension, or revoca-tion of an airman certificate by the Adminis-trator— \n‘‘(A) the district court shall review the denial, \nsuspension, or revocation de novo, including by— \n‘‘(i) conducting a full independent review of \nthe complete administrative record of the denial, suspension, or revocation; \n‘‘(ii) permitting additional discovery and the \ntaking of additional evidence; and \n‘‘(iii) making the findings of fact and conclu-\nsions of law required by Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without being bound to any findings of fact of the Administrator or the National Transportation Safety Board.’’; \n(2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as para-\ngraph (3); and \n(3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the fol-\nlowing: \n‘‘(2) B\nURDEN OF PROOF .—In an appeal filed \nunder subsection (d) in a United States district court after an exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, the burden of proof shall be as follows: \n‘‘(A) In an appeal of the denial of an applica-\ntion for the issuance or renewal of an airman certificate under section 44703 of title 49, United States Code, the burden of proof shall be upon the applicant denied an airman certificate by \nthe Administrator. \n‘‘(B) In an appeal of an order issued by the \nAdministrator under section 44709 of title 49, United States Code, the burden of proof shall be upon the Administrator.’’; and \n(4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(4) A\nPPLICABILITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE PRO -\nCEDURE ACT .—Notwithstanding paragraph \n(1)(A) of this subsection or subsection (a)(1) of section 554 of title 5, United States Code, section 554 of such title shall apply to adjudications of the Administrator and the National Transpor-tation Safety Board to the same extent as that section applied to such adjudications before the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2.’’. \n(c) N\nOTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATION .—Sub-\nsection (b) of section 2 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is amended— \n(1) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ‘‘and the \nspecific activity on which the investigation is based’’ after ‘‘nature of the investigation’’; and \n(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘timely’’; and (3) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘section \n44709(c)(2)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 44709(e)(2)’’. \n(d) R\nELEASE OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS .—Sec-\ntion 2 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is further amended by inserting after subsection (e) the following: \n‘‘(f) R\nELEASE OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS .— \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .— \n‘‘(A) E MERGENCY ORDERS .—In any proceeding \nconducted under part 821 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, relating to the amendment, modification, suspension, or revocation of an airman certificate, in which the Administrator issues an emergency order under subsections (d) and (e) of section 44709, section 44710, or section 46105(c) of title 49, United States Code, or an-other order that takes effect immediately, the Administrator shall provide to the individual holding the airman certificate the releasable portion of the investigative report at the time the Administrator issues the order. If the com-plete Report of Investigation is not available at the time the Emergency Order is issued, the Ad-ministrator shall issue all portions of the report that are available at the time and shall provide the full report within 5 days of its completion. \n‘‘(B) O\nTHER ORDERS .—In any non-emergency \nproceeding conducted under part 821 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, relating to the amendment, modification, suspension, or rev-ocation of an airman certificate, in which the Administrator notifies the certificate holder of a proposed certificate action under subsections (b) and (c) of section 44709 or section 44710 of title 49, United States Code, the Administrator shall, upon the written request of the covered certifi-cate holder and at any time after that notifica-tion, provide to the covered certificate holder the releasable portion of the investigative re-port. \n‘‘(2) M\nOTION FOR DISMISSAL .—If the Adminis-\ntrator does not provide the releasable portions of the investigative report to the individual hold-ing the airman certificate subject to the pro-ceeding referred to in paragraph (1) by the time required by that paragraph, the individual may move to dismiss the complaint of the Adminis-trator or for other relief and, unless the Admin-istrator establishes good cause for the failure to provide the investigative report or for a lack of timeliness, the administrative law judge shall order such relief as the judge considers appro-priate. \n‘‘(3) R\nELEASABLE PORTION OF INVESTIGATIVE \nREPORT .—For purposes of paragraph (1), the re-\nleasable portion of an investigative report is all information in the report, except for the fol-lowing: \n‘‘(A) Information that is privileged. ‘‘(B) Information that constitutes work prod-\nuct or reflects internal deliberative process. \n‘‘(C) Information that would disclose the iden-\ntity of a confidential source. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 6333 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.021 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8677 December 15, 2015 \n‘‘(D) Information the disclosure of which is \nprohibited by any other provision of law. \n‘‘(E) Information that is not relevant to the \nsubject matter of the proceeding. \n‘‘(F) Information the Administrator can dem-\nonstrate is withheld for good cause. \n‘‘(G) Sensitive security information, as defined \nin section 15.5 of title 49, Code of Federal Regu-lations (or any corresponding similar ruling or regulation). \n‘‘(4) R\nULE OF CONSTRUCTION .—Nothing in this \nsubsection shall be construed to prevent the Ad-ministrator from releasing to an individual sub-ject to an investigation described in subsection (b)(1)— \n‘‘(A) information in addition to the informa-\ntion included in the releasable portion of the in-vestigative report; or \n‘‘(B) a copy of the investigative report before \nthe Administrator issues a complaint.’’. \nSEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON REEXAMINATION OF \nCERTIFICATE HOLDERS. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Section 44709(a) of title 49, \nUnited States Code, is amended— \n(1) by striking ‘‘The Administrator’’ and in-\nserting the following: \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator’’; \n(2) by striking ‘‘reexamine’’ and inserting ‘‘, \nexcept as provided in paragraph (2), reexam-ine’’; and \n(3) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(2) L\nIMITATION ON THE REEXAMINATION OF \nAIRMAN CERTIFICATES .— \n‘‘(A) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator may not \nreexamine an airman holding a student, sport, recreational, or private pilot certificate issued under section 44703 of this title if the reexamina-tion is ordered as a result of an event involving the fault of the Federal Aviation Administration or its designee, unless the Administrator has reasonable grounds— \n‘‘(i) to establish that the airman may not be \nqualified to exercise the privileges of a par-ticular certificate or rating, based upon an act or omission committed by the airman while exer-cising those privileges, after the certificate or rating was issued by the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration or its designee; or \n‘‘(ii) to demonstrate that the airman obtained \nthe certificate or the rating through fraudulent means or through an examination that was sub-stantially and demonstrably inadequate to es-tablish the airman’s qualifications. \n‘‘(B) N\nOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS .—Before \ntaking any action to reexamine an airman under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall provide to the airman— \n‘‘(i) a reasonable basis, described in detail, for \nrequesting the reexamination; and \n‘‘(ii) any information gathered by the Federal \nAviation Administration, that the Administrator determines is appropriate to provide, such as the scope and nature of the requested reexamina-tion, that formed the basis for that justifica-tion.’’. \n(b) A\nMENDMENT , MODIFICATION , SUSPENSION , \nORREVOCATION OF AIRMAN CERTIFICATES AFTER \nREEXAMINATION .—Section 44709(b) of title 49, \nUnited States Code, is amended— \n(1) in paragraph (1), by redesignating sub-\nparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively, and indenting appropriately; \n(2) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as \nsubparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, and indenting appropriately; \n(3) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), \nas redesignated, by striking ‘‘The Adminis-trator’’ and inserting the following: \n‘‘(1) I\nN GENERAL .—Except as provided in para-\ngraph (2), the Administrator’’; and \n(4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(2) A\nMENDMENTS , MODIFICATIONS , SUSPEN -\nSIONS , AND REVOCATIONS OF AIRMAN CERTIFI -\nCATES AFTER REEXAMINATION .— \n‘‘(A) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator may not \nissue an order to amend, modify, suspend, or re-voke an airman certificate held by a student, sport, recreational, or private pilot and issued under section 44703 of this title after a reexam-\nination of the airman holding the certificate un-less the Administrator determines that the air-man— \n‘‘(i) lacks the technical skills and competency, \nor care, judgment, and responsibility, necessary to hold and safely exercise the privileges of the certificate; or \n‘‘(ii) materially contributed to the issuance of \nthe certificate by fraudulent means. \n‘‘(B) S\nTANDARD OF REVIEW .—Any order of the \nAdministrator under this paragraph shall be subject to the standard of review provided for under section 2 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44703 note).’’. \n(c) C\nONFORMING AMENDMENTS .—Section \n44709(d)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is amended— \n(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘sub-\nsection (b)(1)(A)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (b)(1)(A)(i)’’; and \n(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘sub-\nsection (b)(1)(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii)’’. \nSEC. 5. EXPEDITING UPDATES TO NOTAM PRO-\nGRAM. \n(a) I NGENERAL .— \n(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Ad-ministrator of the Federal Aviation Administra-tion may not take any enforcement action against any individual for a violation of a NOTAM (as defined in section 3 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44701 note)) until the Administrator certifies to the appropriate con-gressional committees that the Administrator has complied with the requirements of section 3 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights, as amended by this section. \n(2) In this subsection, the term ‘‘appropriate \ncongressional committees’’ means— \n(A) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and \nTransportation of the Senate; and \n(B) the Committee on Transportation and In-\nfrastructure of the House of Representatives. \n(b) A\nMENDMENTS .—Section 3 of the Pilot’s Bill \nof Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1162; 49 U.S.C. 44701 note) is amended— \n(1) in subsection (a)(2)— (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph \n(A)— \n(i) by striking ‘‘this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘the \nPilot’s Bill of Rights 2’’; and \n(ii) by striking ‘‘begin’’ and inserting ‘‘com-\nplete the implementation of’’; \n(B) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as \nfollows: \n‘‘(B) to continue developing and modernizing \nthe NOTAM repository, in a public central loca-tion, to maintain and archive all NOTAMs, in-cluding the original content and form of the no-tices, the original date of publication, and any amendments to such notices with the date of each amendment, in a manner that is Internet- accessible, machine-readable, and searchable;’’; \n(C) in subparagraph (C), by striking the pe-\nriod at the end and inserting a semicolon; and \n(D) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(D) to specify the times during which tem-\nporary flight restrictions are in effect and the duration of a designation of special use airspace in a specific area.’’; and \n(2) by amending subsection (d) to read as fol-\nlows: \n‘‘(d) D\nESIGNATION OF REPOSITORY AS SOLE \nSOURCE FOR NOTAMS .— \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator— \n‘‘(A) shall consider the repository for \nNOTAMs under subsection (a)(2)(B) to be the sole location for airmen to check for NOTAMs; and \n‘‘(B) may not consider a NOTAM to be an-\nnounced or published until the NOTAM is in-cluded in the repository for NOTAMs under sub-section (a)(2)(B). \n‘‘(2) P\nROHIBITION ON TAKING ACTION FOR VIO -\nLATIONS OF NOTAMS NOT IN REPOSITORY .— \n‘‘(A) I N GENERAL .—Except as provided in sub-\nparagraph (B), beginning on the date that the repository under subsection (a)(2)(B) is final \nand published, the Administrator may not take any enforcement action against an airman for a violation of a NOTAM during a flight if— \n‘‘(i) that NOTAM is not available through the \nrepository before the commencement of the flight; and \n‘‘(ii) that NOTAM is not reasonably accessible \nand identifiable to the airman. \n‘‘(B) E\nXCEPTION FOR NATIONAL SECURITY .— \nSubparagraph (A) shall not apply in the case of an enforcement action for a violation of a NOTAM that directly relates to national secu-rity.’’. \nSEC. 6. ACCESSIBILITY OF CERTAIN FLIGHT \nDATA. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Subchapter I of chapter 471 \nof title 49, United States Code, is amended by in-serting after section 47124 the following: \n‘‘§ 47124a. Accessibility of certain flight data \n‘‘(a) D\nEFINITIONS .—In this section: \n‘‘(1) A DMINISTRATION .—The term ‘Administra-\ntion’ means the Federal Aviation Administra-tion. \n‘‘(2) A\nDMINISTRATOR .—The term ‘Adminis-\ntrator’ means the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration. \n‘‘(3) A\nPPLICABLE INDIVIDUAL .—The term ‘ap-\nplicable individual’ means an individual who is the subject of an investigation initiated by the Administrator related to a covered flight record. \n‘‘(4) C\nONTRACT TOWER .—The term ‘contract \ntower’ means an air traffic control tower pro-viding air traffic control services pursuant to a contract with the Administration under the con-tract air traffic control tower program under section 47124(b)(3). \n‘‘(5) C\nOVERED FLIGHT RECORD .—The term ‘cov-\nered flight record’ means any air traffic data (as defined in section 2(b)(4)(B) of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44703 note)), created, main-tained, or controlled by any program of the Ad-ministration, including any program of the Ad-ministration carried out by employees or con-tractors of the Administration, such as contract towers, flight service stations, and controller training programs. \n‘‘(b) P\nROVISION OF COVERED FLIGHT RECORD \nTOADMINISTRATION .— \n‘‘(1) R EQUESTS .—Whenever the Administration \nreceives a written request for a covered flight record from an applicable individual and the covered flight record is not in the possession of the Administration, the Administrator shall re-quest the covered flight record from the contract tower or other contractor of the Administration in possession of the covered flight record. \n‘‘(2) P\nROVISION OF RECORDS .—Any covered \nflight record created, maintained, or controlled by a contract tower or another contractor of the Administration that maintains covered flight records shall be provided to the Administration if the Administration requests the record pursu-ant to paragraph (1). \n‘‘(3) N\nOTICE OF PROPOSED CERTIFICATE AC -\nTION.—If the Administrator has issued, or subse-\nquently issues, a Notice of Proposed Certificate Action relying on evidence contained in the cov-ered flight record and the individual who is the subject of an investigation has requested the record, the Administrator shall promptly produce the record and extend the time the indi-vidual has to respond to the Notice of Proposed Certificate Action until the covered flight record is provided. \n‘‘(c) I\nMPLEMENTATION .— \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .—Not later than 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations or guidance to ensure compliance with this section. \n‘‘(2) C\nOMPLIANCE BY CONTRACTORS .— \n‘‘(A) Compliance with this section by a con-\ntract tower or other contractor of the Adminis-tration that maintains covered flight records \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 6333 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.021 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8678 December 15, 2015 \nshall be included as a material term in any con-\ntract between the Administration and the con-tract tower or contractor entered into or re-newed on or after the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2. \n‘‘(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any \ncontract or agreement in effect on the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 unless the contract or agreement is renegotiated, re-newed, or modified after that date.’’. \n(b) T\nECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMEND -\nMENTS .—The table of contents for chapter 471 of \ntitle 49, United States Code, is amended by in-serting after the item relating to section 47124 the following: \n‘‘47124a. Accessibility of certain flight data.’’. \nSEC. 7. AUTHORITY FOR LEGAL COUNSEL TO \nISSUE CERTAIN NOTICES. \nNot later than 180 days after the date of en-\nactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall revise section 13.11 of title 14, Code of Federal Regula-tions, to authorize legal counsel of the Federal Aviation Administration to close enforcement actions covered by that section with a warning notice, letter of correction, or other administra-tive action. \nMr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I further \nask unanimous consent that the Fein-stein amendment be agreed to; that the committee-reported substitute, as amended, be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; and that the motion to recon-sider be considered made and laid upon the table. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there \nobjection? \nThe Senator from Connecticut. Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, \nreserving the right to object, I want to thank the Senator from Oklahoma for his hard work and his dedication to the Pilot’s Bill of Rights, which is before us now, and I know he has in his heart and mind the best interests of our avia-tion public. \nI have sought to improve this bill. I \nhave had strong concerns about a num-ber of its provisions. I want to thank him and thank Senator T\nHUNE , Senator \nNELSON , and Senator M ANCHIN , as well \nas Senator F EINSTEIN and Senator \nREED, for the improvements they have \nmade to the bill. But I feel, with all due respect, that problems remain. \nWe have an effective medical certifi-\ncation system now which, unfortu-nately, this bill undermines, in my view. This bill replaces it with an un-tested framework, making it easier for people with dangerous medical condi-tions to fly. There is really no medical certificate effective to deal with poten-tial medical problems. I am gravely concerned that this bill may lead to an increase in the number of aviation ac-cidents. \nMy hope is—since it has 69 cospon-\nsors, and the will of the Senate now is apparently to move forward—that we can perhaps improve it in the course of the FAA reauthorization. I hope some of these issues can be addressed in that process. I hope my colleague Senator I\nNHOFE will work with me to keep the \npolicy proposals outlined in this bill in mind as we go forward with the FAA reauthorization bill—and that is sched-uled to be sometime next year—so that further improvements can be given due consideration. \nAgain, I thank the Senator from \nOklahoma for his hard work on this bill, and I withdraw my objection. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nThe amendment (No. 2928) was agreed \nto, as follows: \n(Purpose: To clarify the administrative au-\nthorities and to improve the physician cer-tification) \nOn page 37, line 12, after the period, insert \nthe following: ‘‘I certify that I am not aware of any medical condition that, as presently treated, could interfere with the individual’s ability to safely operate an aircraft.’’. \nOn page 40, line 6, insert ‘‘and signed by \nthe physician’’ after ‘‘followed’’. \nOn page 48, between lines 3 and 4, insert \nthe following: \n(l) A\nUTHORITY TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL IN-\nFORMATION .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—If the Administrator re-\nceives credible or urgent information, in-cluding from the National Driver Register or the Administrator’s Safety Hotline, that re-flects on an individual’s ability to safely op-erate a covered aircraft under the third-class medical certificate exemption in subsection (a), the Administrator may require the indi-vidual to provide additional information or history so that the Administrator may de-termine whether the individual is safe to continue operating a covered aircraft. \n(2) U\nSE OF INFORMATION .—The Adminis-\ntrator may use credible or urgent informa-tion received under paragraph (1) to request an individual to provide additional informa-tion or to take actions under section 44709(b) of title 49, United States Code. \nThe committee-reported amendment \nin the nature of a substitute, as amend-ed, was agreed to. \nThe bill (S. 571), as amended, was or-\ndered to be engrossed for a third read-ing, was read the third time, and passed, as follows: \nS. 571 \nBe it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-\nresentatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, \nSECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. \nThis Act may be cited as ‘‘Pilot’s Bill of \nRights 2’’. \nSEC. 2. MEDICAL CERTIFICATION OF CERTAIN \nSMALL AIRCRAFT PILOTS. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Not later than 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration shall issue or revise regulations to ensure that an individual may operate as pilot in command of a covered aircraft if— \n(1) the individual possesses a valid driver’s \nlicense issued by a State, territory, or pos-session of the United States and complies with all medical requirements or restrictions associated with that license; \n(2) the individual holds a medical certifi-\ncate issued by the Federal Aviation Adminis-tration on the date of enactment of this Act, held such a certificate at any point during the 10-year period preceding such date of en-actment, or obtains such a certificate after such date of enactment; \n(3) the most recent medical certificate \nissued by the Federal Aviation Administra-tion to the individual— \n(A) indicates whether the certificate is \nfirst, second, or third class; \n(B) may include authorization for special \nissuance; \n(C) may be expired; (D) cannot have been revoked or sus-\npended; and \n(E) cannot have been withdrawn; (4) the most recent application for airman \nmedical certification submitted to the Fed-eral Aviation Administration by the indi-vidual cannot have been completed and de-nied; \n(5) the individual has completed a medical \neducation course described in subsection (c) during the 24 calendar months before acting \nas pilot in command of a covered aircraft and demonstrates proof of completion of the course; \n(6) the individual, when serving as a pilot \nin command, is under the care and treatment of a physician if the individual has been di-agnosed with any medical condition that may impact the ability of the individual to fly; \n(7) the individual has received a com-\nprehensive medical examination from a State-licensed physician during the previous 48 months and— \n(A) prior to the examination, the indi-\nvidual— \n(i) completed the individual’s section of \nthe checklist described in subsection (b); and \n(ii) provided the completed checklist to the \nphysician performing the examination; and \n(B) the physician conducted the com-\nprehensive medical examination in accord-ance with the checklist described in sub-section (b), checking each item specified dur-ing the examination and addressing, as medi-cally appropriate, every medical condition listed, and any medications the individual is taking; and \n(8) the individual is operating in accord-\nance with the following conditions: \n(A) The covered aircraft is carrying not \nmore than 5 passengers. \n(B) The individual is operating the covered \naircraft under visual flight rules or instru-ment flight rules. \n(C) The flight, including each portion of \nthat flight, is not carried out— \n(i) for compensation or hire, including that \nno passenger or property on the flight is being carried for compensation or hire; \n(ii) at an altitude that is more than 18,000 \nfeet above mean sea level; \n(iii) outside the United States, unless au-\nthorized by the country in which the flight is conducted; or \n(iv) at an indicated air speed exceeding 250 \nknots. \n(b) C\nOMPREHENSIVE MEDICAL EXAMINA -\nTION.— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—Not later than 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall develop a checklist for an individual to complete and provide to the physician performing the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7). \n(2) R\nEQUIREMENTS .—The checklist shall \ncontain— \n(A) a section, for the individual to com-\nplete that contains— \n(i) boxes 3 through 13 and boxes 16 through \n19 of the Federal Aviation Administration Form 8500–8 (3–99); \n(ii) a signature line for the individual to \naffirm that— \n(I) the answers provided by the individual \non that checklist, including the individual’s answers regarding medical history, are true and complete; \n(II) the individual understands that he or \nshe is prohibited under Federal Aviation Ad-ministration regulations from acting as pilot in command, or any other capacity as a re-quired flight crew member, if he or she knows or has reason to know of any medical deficiency or medically disqualifying condi-tion that would make the individual unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner; and \n(III) the individual is aware of the regula-\ntions pertaining to the prohibition on oper-ations during medical deficiency and has no medically disqualifying conditions in accord-ance with applicable law; \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:23 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.021 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8679 December 15, 2015 \n(B) a section with instructions for the indi-\nvidual to provide the completed checklist to the physician performing the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7); and \n(C) a section, for the physician to com-\nplete, that instructs the physician— \n(i) to perform a clinical examination of— (I) head, face, neck, and scalp; (II) nose, sinuses, mouth, and throat; (III) ears, general (internal and external \ncanals), and eardrums (perforation); \n(IV) eyes (general), ophthalmoscopic, pu-\npils (equality and reaction), and ocular mo-tility (associated parallel movement, nys-tagmus); \n(V) lungs and chest (not including breast \nexamination); \n(VI) heart (precordial activity, rhythm, \nsounds, and murmurs); \n(VII) vascular system (pulse, amplitude, \nand character, and arms, legs, and others); \n(VIII) abdomen and viscera (including her-\nnia); \n(IX) anus (not including digital examina-\ntion); \n(X) skin; (XI) G–U system (not including pelvic ex-\namination); \n(XII) upper and lower extremities (strength \nand range of motion); \n(XIII) spine and other musculoskeletal; (XIV) identifying body marks, scars, and \ntattoos (size and location); \n(XV) lymphatics; (XVI) neurologic (tendon reflexes, equi-\nlibrium, senses, cranial nerves, and coordina-tion, etc.); \n(XVII) psychiatric (appearance, behavior, \nmood, communication, and memory); \n(XVIII) general systemic; (XIX) hearing; (XX) vision (distant, near, and inter-\nmediate vision, field of vision, color vision, and ocular alignment); \n(XXI) blood pressure and pulse; and (XXII) anything else the physician, in his \nor her medical judgment, considers nec-essary; \n(ii) to exercise medical discretion to ad-\ndress, as medically appropriate, any medical conditions identified, and to exercise med-ical discretion in determining whether any medical tests are warranted as part of the comprehensive medical examination; \n(iii) to discuss all drugs the individual re-\nports taking (prescription and nonprescrip-tion) and their potential to interfere with the safe operation of an aircraft or motor ve-hicle; \n(iv) to sign the checklist, stating: ‘‘I cer-\ntify that I discussed all items on this check-list with the individual during my examina-tion, discussed any medications the indi-vidual is taking that could interfere with their ability to safely operate an aircraft or motor vehicle, and performed an examina-tion that included all of the items on this checklist. I certify that I am not aware of any medical condition that, as presently treated, could interfere with the individual’s ability to safely operate an aircraft.’’; and \n(v) to provide the date the comprehensive \nmedical examination was completed, and the physician’s full name, address, telephone number, and State medical license number. \n(3) L\nOGBOOK .—The completed checklist \nshall be retained in the individual’s logbook and made available on request. \n(c) M\nEDICAL EDUCATION COURSE REQUIRE -\nMENTS .—The medical education course de-\nscribed in this subsection shall— \n(1) be available on the Internet free of \ncharge; \n(2) be developed and periodically updated \nin coordination with representatives of rel-evant nonprofit and not-for-profit general aviation stakeholder groups; (3) educate pilots on conducting medical \nself-assessments; \n(4) advise pilots on identifying warning \nsigns of potential serious medical conditions; \n(5) identify risk mitigation strategies for \nmedical conditions; \n(6) increase awareness of the impacts of po-\ntentially impairing over-the-counter and prescription drug medications; \n(7) encourage regular medical examina-\ntions and consultations with primary care physicians; \n(8) inform pilots of the regulations per-\ntaining to the prohibition on operations dur-ing medical deficiency and medically dis-qualifying conditions; \n(9) provide the checklist developed by the \nFederal Aviation Administration in accord-ance with subsection (b); and \n(10) upon successful completion of the \ncourse, electronically provide to the indi-vidual and transmit to the Federal Aviation Administration— \n(A) a certification of completion of the \nmedical education course, which shall be printed and retained in the individual’s log-book and made available upon request, and shall contain the individual’s name, address, and airman certificate number; \n(B) subject to subsection (d), a release au-\nthorizing the National Driver Register through a designated State Department of Motor Vehicles to furnish to the Federal Aviation Administration information per-taining to the individual’s driving record; \n(C) a certification by the individual that \nthe individual is under the care and treat-\nment of a physician if the individual has been diagnosed with any medical condition that may impact the ability of the individual to fly, as required under (a)(6); \n(D) a form that includes— (i) the name, address, telephone number, \nand airman certificate number of the indi-vidual; \n(ii) the name, address, telephone number, \nand State medical license number of the physician performing the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7); \n(iii) the date of the comprehensive medical \nexamination required in subsection (a)(7); and \n(iv) a certification by the individual that \nthe checklist described in subsection (b) was followed and signed by the physician in the comprehensive medical examination re-quired in subsection (a)(7); and \n(E) a statement, which shall be printed, \nand signed by the individual certifying that the individual understands the existing pro-hibition on operations during medical defi-ciency by stating: ‘‘I understand that I can-not act as pilot in command, or any other capacity as a required flight crew member, if I know or have reason to know of any med-ical condition that would make me unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.’’. \n(d) N\nATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER .—The au-\nthorization under subsection (c)(10)(B) shall be an authorization for a single access to the information contained in the National Driv-er Register. \n(e) S\nPECIAL ISSUANCE PROCESS .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—An individual who has \nqualified for the third-class medical certifi-cate exemption under subsection (a) and is seeking to serve as a pilot in command of a covered aircraft shall be required to have completed the process for obtaining an Au-thorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate for each of the following: \n(A) A mental health disorder, limited to an \nestablished medical history or clinical diag-nosis of— \n(i) personality disorder that is severe \nenough to have repeatedly manifested itself by overt acts; (ii) psychosis, defined as a case in which an \nindividual— \n(I) has manifested delusions, halluci-\nnations, grossly bizarre or disorganized be-havior, or other commonly accepted symp-toms of psychosis; or \n(II) may reasonably be expected to mani-\nfest delusions, hallucinations, grossly bizarre or disorganized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of psychosis; \n(iii) bipolar disorder; or (iv) substance dependence within the pre-\nvious 2 years, as defined in section 67.307(a)(4) of title 14, Code of Federal Regu-lations. \n(B) A neurological disorder, limited to an \nestablished medical history or clinical diag-nosis of any of the following: \n(i) Epilepsy. (ii) Disturbance of consciousness without \nsatisfactory medical explanation of the cause. \n(iii) A transient loss of control of nervous \nsystem functions without satisfactory med-ical explanation of the cause. \n(C) A cardiovascular condition, limited to \na one-time special issuance for each diag-nosis of the following: \n(i) Myocardial infraction. (ii) Coronary heart disease that has re-\nquired treatment. \n(iii) Cardiac valve replacement. (iv) Heart replacement. (2) S\nPECIAL RULE FOR CARDIOVASCULAR CON -\nDITIONS .—In the case of an individual with a \ncardiovascular condition, the process for ob-taining an Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate shall be satisfied with the successful completion of an appropriate clinical evaluation without a mandatory wait period. \n(3) S\nPECIAL RULE FOR MENTAL HEALTH CON -\nDITIONS .— \n(A) In the case of an individual with a \nclinically diagnosed mental health condi-tion, the third-class medical certificate ex-emption under subsection (a) shall not apply if— \n(i) in the judgment of the individual’s \nState-licensed medical specialist, the condi-tion— \n(I) renders the individual unable to safely \nperform the duties or exercise the airman privileges described in subsection (a)(8); or \n(II) may reasonably be expected to make \nthe individual unable to perform the duties or exercise the privileges described in sub-section (a)(8); or \n(ii) the individual’s driver’s license is re-\nvoked by the issuing agency as a result of a clinically diagnosed mental health condi-\ntion. \n(B) Subject to subparagraph (A), an indi-\nvidual clinically diagnosed with a mental health condition shall certify every 2 years, in conjunction with the certification under subsection (c)(10)(C), that the individual is under the care of a State-licensed medical specialist for that mental health condition. \n(4) S\nPECIAL RULE FOR NEUROLOGICAL CONDI -\nTIONS .— \n(A) In the case of an individual with a \nclinically diagnosed neurological condition, the third-class medical certificate exemption under subsection (a) shall not apply if— \n(i) in the judgment of the individual’s \nState-licensed medical specialist, the condi-tion— \n(I) renders the individual unable to safely \nperform the duties or exercise the airman privileges described in subsection (a)(8); or \n(II) may reasonably be expected to make \nthe individual unable to perform the duties or exercise the privileges described in sub-section (a)(8); or \n(ii) the individual’s driver’s license is re-\nvoked by the issuing agency as a result of a clinically diagnosed neurological condition. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.025 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8680 December 15, 2015 \n(B) Subject to subparagraph (A), an indi-\nvidual clinically diagnosed with a neuro-logical condition shall certify every 2 years, in conjunction with the certification under subsection (c)(10)(C), that the individual is under the care of a State-licensed medical specialist for that neurological condition. \n(f) I\nDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL MEDICAL \nCONDITIONS FOR THE CACI P ROGRAM .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—Not later than 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall review and identify ad-ditional medical conditions that could be added to the program known as the Condi-tions AMEs Can Issue (CACI) program. \n(2) C\nONSULTATIONS .—In carrying out para-\ngraph (1), the Administrator shall consult with aviation, medical, and union stake-holders. \n(3) R\nEPORT REQUIRED .—Not later than 180 \ndays after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the Com-mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor-tation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report listing the medical conditions that have been added to the CACI program under paragraph (1). \n(g) E\nXPEDITED AUTHORIZATION FOR SPECIAL \nISSUANCE OF A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator shall \nimplement procedures to expedite the proc-ess for obtaining an Authorization for Spe-cial Issuance of a Medical Certificate under section 67.401 of title 14, Code of Federal Reg-ulations. \n(2) C\nONSULTATIONS .—In carrying out para-\ngraph (1), the Administrator shall consult with aviation, medical, and union stake-holders. \n(3) R\nEPORT REQUIRED .—Not later than 1 \nyear after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the Com-mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor-tation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report describing how the procedures implemented under para-graph (1) will streamline the process for ob-taining an Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate and reduce the amount of time needed to review and de-cide special issuance cases. \n(h) R\nEPORT REQUIRED .—Not later than 5 \nyears after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in coordination with the National Transportation Safety Board, shall submit to the Committee on Com-merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transpor-tation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report that describes the effect of the regulations issued or revised under subsection (a) and includes statistics \nwith respect to changes in small aircraft ac-tivity and safety incidents. \n(i) P\nROHIBITION ON ENFORCEMENT AC-\nTIONS .—Beginning on the date that is 1 year \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator may not take an enforcement action for not holding a valid third-class medical certificate against a pilot of a cov-ered aircraft for a flight, through a good faith effort, if the pilot and the flight meet the applicable requirements under sub-section (a), except paragraph (5), unless the Administrator has published final regula-tions in the Federal Register under that sub-section. \n(j) C\nOVERED AIRCRAFT DEFINED .—In this \nsection, the term ‘‘covered aircraft’’ means an aircraft that— \n(1) is authorized under Federal law to carry \nnot more than 6 occupants; and \n(2) has a maximum certificated takeoff \nweight of not more than 6,000 pounds. \n(k) O\nPERATIONS COVERED .—The provisions \nand requirements covered in this section do not apply to pilots who elect to operate \nunder the medical requirements under sub-section (b) or subsection (c) of section 61.23 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. \n(l) A\nUTHORITY TOREQUIRE ADDITIONAL IN-\nFORMATION .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—If the Administrator re-\nceives credible or urgent information, in-cluding from the National Driver Register or the Administrator’s Safety Hotline, that re-flects on an individual’s ability to safely op-erate a covered aircraft under the third-class medical certificate exemption in subsection (a), the Administrator may require the indi-vidual to provide additional information or history so that the Administrator may de-termine whether the individual is safe to continue operating a covered aircraft. \n(2) U\nSE OF INFORMATION .—The Adminis-\ntrator may use credible or urgent informa-tion received under paragraph (1) to request an individual to provide additional informa-tion or to take actions under section 44709(b) of title 49, United States Code. \nSEC. 3. EXPANSION OF PILOT’S BILL OF RIGHTS. \n(a) A PPEALS OF SUSPENDED AND REVOKED \nAIRMAN CERTIFICATES .—Section 2(d)(1) of the \nPilot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is amended by striking ‘‘or imposing a punitive civil action or an emergency order of revocation under subsections (d) and (e) of section 44709 of such title’’ and inserting ‘‘suspending or re-voking an airman certificate under section 44709(d) of such title, or imposing an emer-gency order of revocation under subsections (d) and (e) of section 44709 of such title’’. \n(b) D\nENOVO REVIEW BY DISTRICT COURT ; \nBURDEN OF PROOF .—Section 2(e) of the Pi-\nlot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is amended— \n(1) by amending paragraph (1) to read as \nfollows: \n‘‘(1) I\nN GENERAL .—In an appeal filed under \nsubsection (d) in a United States district court with respect to a denial, suspension, or revocation of an airman certificate by the Administrator— \n‘‘(A) the district court shall review the de-\nnial, suspension, or revocation de novo, in-cluding by— \n‘‘(i) conducting a full independent review \nof the complete administrative record of the denial, suspension, or revocation; \n‘‘(ii) permitting additional discovery and \nthe taking of additional evidence; and \n‘‘(iii) making the findings of fact and con-\nclusions of law required by Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without being bound to any findings of fact of the Ad-ministrator or the National Transportation Safety Board.’’; \n(2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as para-\ngraph (3); and \n(3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the fol-\nlowing: \n‘‘(2) B\nURDEN OF PROOF .—In an appeal filed \nunder subsection (d) in a United States dis-trict court after an exhaustion of adminis-trative remedies, the burden of proof shall be as follows: \n‘‘(A) In an appeal of the denial of an appli-\ncation for the issuance or renewal of an air-man certificate under section 44703 of title 49, United States Code, the burden of proof shall be upon the applicant denied an airman certificate by the Administrator. \n‘‘(B) In an appeal of an order issued by the \nAdministrator under section 44709 of title 49, United States Code, the burden of proof shall be upon the Administrator.’’; and \n(4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(4) A\nPPLICABILITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE PRO -\nCEDURE ACT .—Notwithstanding paragraph \n(1)(A) of this subsection or subsection (a)(1) of section 554 of title 5, United States Code, section 554 of such title shall apply to adju-dications of the Administrator and the Na-\ntional Transportation Safety Board to the same extent as that section applied to such adjudications before the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2.’’. \n(c) N\nOTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATION .—Sub-\nsection (b) of section 2 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is amended— \n(1) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ‘‘and \nthe specific activity on which the investiga-tion is based’’ after ‘‘nature of the investiga-tion’’; and \n(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘timely’’; \nand \n(3) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘section \n44709(c)(2)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 44709(e)(2)’’. \n(d) R\nELEASE OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS .— \nSection 2 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is further amended by inserting after subsection (e) the following: \n‘‘(f) R\nELEASE OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS .— \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .— \n‘‘(A) E MERGENCY ORDERS .—In any pro-\nceeding conducted under part 821 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, relating to the amendment, modification, suspension, or revocation of an airman certificate, in which the Administrator issues an emergency order under subsections (d) and (e) of section 44709, section 44710, or section 46105(c) of title 49, United States Code, or another order that takes effect immediately, the Administrator shall provide to the individual holding the airman certificate the releasable portion of the investigative report at the time the Ad-ministrator issues the order. If the complete Report of Investigation is not available at the time the Emergency Order is issued, the Administrator shall issue all portions of the report that are available at the time and shall provide the full report within 5 days of its completion. \n‘‘(B) O\nTHER ORDERS .—In any non-emer-\ngency proceeding conducted under part 821 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, relat-ing to the amendment, modification, suspen-sion, or revocation of an airman certificate, in which the Administrator notifies the cer-tificate holder of a proposed certificate ac-tion under subsections (b) and (c) of section 44709 or section 44710 of title 49, United States Code, the Administrator shall, upon the written request of the covered certificate holder and at any time after that notifica-tion, provide to the covered certificate hold-er the releasable portion of the investigative report. \n‘‘(2) M\nOTION FOR DISMISSAL .—If the Admin-\nistrator does not provide the releasable por-tions of the investigative report to the indi-vidual holding the airman certificate subject to the proceeding referred to in paragraph (1) by the time required by that paragraph, the individual may move to dismiss the com-plaint of the Administrator or for other re-lief and, unless the Administrator estab-lishes good cause for the failure to provide the investigative report or for a lack of timeliness, the administrative law judge shall order such relief as the judge considers appropriate. \n‘‘(3) R\nELEASABLE PORTION OF INVESTIGATIVE \nREPORT .—For purposes of paragraph (1), the \nreleasable portion of an investigative report is all information in the report, except for the following: \n‘‘(A) Information that is privileged. ‘‘(B) Information that constitutes work \nproduct or reflects internal deliberative process. \n‘‘(C) Information that would disclose the \nidentity of a confidential source. \n‘‘(D) Information the disclosure of which is \nprohibited by any other provision of law. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.025 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8681 December 15, 2015 \n‘‘(E) Information that is not relevant to \nthe subject matter of the proceeding. \n‘‘(F) Information the Administrator can \ndemonstrate is withheld for good cause. \n‘‘(G) Sensitive security information, as de-\nfined in section 15.5 of title 49, Code of Fed-eral Regulations (or any corresponding simi-lar ruling or regulation). \n‘‘(4) R\nULE OF CONSTRUCTION .—Nothing in \nthis subsection shall be construed to prevent the Administrator from releasing to an indi-vidual subject to an investigation described in subsection (b)(1)— \n‘‘(A) information in addition to the infor-\nmation included in the releasable portion of the investigative report; or \n‘‘(B) a copy of the investigative report be-\nfore the Administrator issues a complaint.’’. \nSEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON REEXAMINATION OF \nCERTIFICATE HOLDERS. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Section 44709(a) of title \n49, United States Code, is amended— \n(1) by striking ‘‘The Administrator’’ and \ninserting the following: \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator’’; \n(2) by striking ‘‘reexamine’’ and inserting \n‘‘, except as provided in paragraph (2), reex-amine’’; and \n(3) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(2) L\nIMITATION ON THE REEXAMINATION OF \nAIRMAN CERTIFICATES .— \n‘‘(A) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator may \nnot reexamine an airman holding a student, sport, recreational, or private pilot certifi-cate issued under section 44703 of this title if the reexamination is ordered as a result of an event involving the fault of the Federal Aviation Administration or its designee, un-less the Administrator has reasonable grounds— \n‘‘(i) to establish that the airman may not \nbe qualified to exercise the privileges of a \nparticular certificate or rating, based upon an act or omission committed by the airman while exercising those privileges, after the certificate or rating was issued by the Fed-eral Aviation Administration or its designee; or \n‘‘(ii) to demonstrate that the airman ob-\ntained the certificate or the rating through fraudulent means or through an examination that was substantially and demonstrably in-adequate to establish the airman’s qualifica-tions. \n‘‘(B) N\nOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS .—Before \ntaking any action to reexamine an airman under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall provide to the airman— \n‘‘(i) a reasonable basis, described in detail, \nfor requesting the reexamination; and \n‘‘(ii) any information gathered by the Fed-\neral Aviation Administration, that the Ad-ministrator determines is appropriate to pro-vide, such as the scope and nature of the re-quested reexamination, that formed the basis for that justification.’’. \n(b) A\nMENDMENT , MODIFICATION , SUSPENSION , \nORREVOCATION OF AIRMAN CERTIFICATES \nAFTER REEXAMINATION .—Section 44709(b) of \ntitle 49, United States Code, is amended— \n(1) in paragraph (1), by redesignating sub-\nparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively, and indenting appropriately; \n(2) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) \nas subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, and indenting appropriately; \n(3) in the matter preceding subparagraph \n(A), as redesignated, by striking ‘‘The Ad-ministrator’’ and inserting the following: \n‘‘(1) I\nN GENERAL .—Except as provided in \nparagraph (2), the Administrator’’; and \n(4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(2) A\nMENDMENTS , MODIFICATIONS , SUSPEN -\nSIONS , AND REVOCATIONS OF AIRMAN CERTIFI -\nCATES AFTER REEXAMINATION .— \n‘‘(A) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator may \nnot issue an order to amend, modify, sus-pend, or revoke an airman certificate held by a student, sport, recreational, or private \npilot and issued under section 44703 of this title after a reexamination of the airman holding the certificate unless the Adminis-trator determines that the airman— \n‘‘(i) lacks the technical skills and com-\npetency, or care, judgment, and responsi-bility, necessary to hold and safely exercise the privileges of the certificate; or \n‘‘(ii) materially contributed to the \nissuance of the certificate by fraudulent means. \n‘‘(B) S\nTANDARD OF REVIEW .—Any order of \nthe Administrator under this paragraph shall be subject to the standard of review provided for under section 2 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44703 note).’’. \n(c) C\nONFORMING AMENDMENTS .—Section \n44709(d)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is amended— \n(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘sub-\nsection (b)(1)(A)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (b)(1)(A)(i)’’; and \n(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘sub-\nsection (b)(1)(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii)’’. \nSEC. 5. EXPEDITING UPDATES TO NOTAM PRO-\nGRAM. \n(a) I NGENERAL .— \n(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration may not take any enforcement action against any individual for a violation of a NOTAM (as defined in section 3 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44701 note)) until the Administrator certifies to the ap-propriate congressional committees that the Administrator has complied with the re-quirements of section 3 of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights, as amended by this section. \n(2) In this subsection, the term ‘‘appro-\npriate congressional committees’’ means— \n(A) the Committee on Commerce, Science, \nand Transportation of the Senate; and \n(B) the Committee on Transportation and \nInfrastructure of the House of Representa-tives. \n(b) A\nMENDMENTS .—Section 3 of the Pilot’s \nBill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1162; 49 U.S.C. 44701 note) is amended— \n(1) in subsection (a)(2)— (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph \n(A)— \n(i) by striking ‘‘this Act’’ and inserting \n‘‘the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2’’; and \n(ii) by striking ‘‘begin’’ and inserting \n‘‘complete the implementation of’’; \n(B) by amending subparagraph (B) to read \nas follows: \n‘‘(B) to continue developing and modern-\nizing the NOTAM repository, in a public cen-tral location, to maintain and archive all NOTAMs, including the original content and form of the notices, the original date of pub-lication, and any amendments to such no-tices with the date of each amendment, in a manner that is Internet-accessible, machine- readable, and searchable;’’; \n(C) in subparagraph (C), by striking the pe-\nriod at the end and inserting a semicolon; and \n(D) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(D) to specify the times during which \ntemporary flight restrictions are in effect and the duration of a designation of special use airspace in a specific area.’’; and \n(2) by amending subsection (d) to read as \nfollows: \n‘‘(d) D\nESIGNATION OF REPOSITORY AS SOLE \nSOURCE FOR NOTAMS .— \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .—The Administrator— \n‘‘(A) shall consider the repository for \nNOTAMs under subsection (a)(2)(B) to be the sole location for airmen to check for NOTAMs; and \n‘‘(B) may not consider a NOTAM to be an-\nnounced or published until the NOTAM is in-cluded in the repository for NOTAMs under \nsubsection (a)(2)(B). \n‘‘(2) P\nROHIBITION ON TAKING ACTION FOR VIO -\nLATIONS OF NOTAMS NOT IN REPOSITORY .— \n‘‘(A) I N GENERAL .—Except as provided in \nsubparagraph (B), beginning on the date that the repository under subsection (a)(2)(B) is final and published, the Administrator may not take any enforcement action against an airman for a violation of a NOTAM during a flight if— \n‘‘(i) that NOTAM is not available through \nthe repository before the commencement of the flight; and \n‘‘(ii) that NOTAM is not reasonably acces-\nsible and identifiable to the airman. \n‘‘(B) E\nXCEPTION FOR NATIONAL SECURITY .— \nSubparagraph (A) shall not apply in the case of an enforcement action for a violation of a NOTAM that directly relates to national se-curity.’’. \nSEC. 6. ACCESSIBILITY OF CERTAIN FLIGHT \nDATA. \n(a) I NGENERAL .—Subchapter I of chapter \n471 of title 49, United States Code, is amend-ed by inserting after section 47124 the fol-lowing: \n‘‘§ 47124a. Accessibility of certain flight data \n‘‘(a) D\nEFINITIONS .—In this section: \n‘‘(1) A DMINISTRATION .—The term ‘Adminis-\ntration’ means the Federal Aviation Admin-istration. \n‘‘(2) A\nDMINISTRATOR .—The term ‘Adminis-\ntrator’ means the Administrator of the Fed-eral Aviation Administration. \n‘‘(3) A\nPPLICABLE INDIVIDUAL .—The term \n‘applicable individual’ means an individual who is the subject of an investigation initi-ated by the Administrator related to a cov-ered flight record. \n‘‘(4) C\nONTRACT TOWER .—The term ‘contract \ntower’ means an air traffic control tower providing air traffic control services pursu-ant to a contract with the Administration under the contract air traffic control tower program under section 47124(b)(3). \n‘‘(5) C\nOVERED FLIGHT RECORD .—The term \n‘covered flight record’ means any air traffic data (as defined in section 2(b)(4)(B) of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44703 note)), created, maintained, or controlled by any program of the Administration, including any program of the Administration carried out by employees or contractors of the Ad-ministration, such as contract towers, flight service stations, and controller training pro-grams. \n‘‘(b) P\nROVISION OF COVERED FLIGHT RECORD \nTOADMINISTRATION .— \n‘‘(1) R EQUESTS .—Whenever the Administra-\ntion receives a written request for a covered flight record from an applicable individual and the covered flight record is not in the possession of the Administration, the Ad-ministrator shall request the covered flight record from the contract tower or other con-tractor of the Administration in possession of the covered flight record. \n‘‘(2) P\nROVISION OF RECORDS .—Any covered \nflight record created, maintained, or con-trolled by a contract tower or another con-tractor of the Administration that main-\ntains covered flight records shall be provided to the Administration if the Administration requests the record pursuant to paragraph (1). \n‘‘(3) N\nOTICE OF PROPOSED CERTIFICATE AC -\nTION.—If the Administrator has issued, or \nsubsequently issues, a Notice of Proposed Certificate Action relying on evidence con-tained in the covered flight record and the individual who is the subject of an investiga-tion has requested the record, the Adminis-trator shall promptly produce the record and extend the time the individual has to re-spond to the Notice of Proposed Certificate Action until the covered flight record is pro-vided. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.025 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8682 December 15, 2015 \n‘‘(c) I MPLEMENTATION .— \n‘‘(1) I N GENERAL .—Not later than 180 days \nafter the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2, the Administrator shall pro-mulgate regulations or guidance to ensure compliance with this section. \n‘‘(2) C\nOMPLIANCE BY CONTRACTORS .— \n‘‘(A) Compliance with this section by a \ncontract tower or other contractor of the Administration that maintains covered flight records shall be included as a material term in any contract between the Adminis-tration and the contract tower or contractor entered into or renewed on or after the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2. \n‘‘(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to \nany contract or agreement in effect on the date of enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 unless the contract or agreement is renegotiated, renewed, or modified after that date.’’. \n(b) T\nECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMEND -\nMENTS .—The table of contents for chapter 471 \nof title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 47124 the following: \n‘‘47124a. Accessibility of certain flight \ndata.’’. \nSEC. 7. AUTHORITY FOR LEGAL COUNSEL TO \nISSUE CERTAIN NOTICES. \nNot later than 180 days after the date of \nenactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall revise section 13.11 of title 14, Code of Fed-eral Regulations, to authorize legal counsel of the Federal Aviation Administration to close enforcement actions covered by that section with a warning notice, letter of cor-rection, or other administrative action. \nMr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of \nall, let me thank the Senator from Connecticut, because it is complicated. This is something that—it is also very difficult to actually explain a bill to 69 people and get that many cosponsors. But it is something we have been con-cerned about for a long time. Ten years ago, on the light aircraft, we actually had this language—even stronger than it is now. In that period of time, there hasn’t been one accident that can be related to a third-class medical. I think the time has proven itself in 10 years. \nTo respond, I would be very happy to \nwork with the Senator from Con-necticut on problems that may rise that I don’t envision right now. I ap-preciate very much his cooperation and also his staying around this late at night. \nThank you so much. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will call the roll. \nThe bill clerk proceeded to call the \nroll. \nMr. M\nCCONNELL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nADDITIONAL STATEMENTS \nCONGRATULATING MEGHAN ABLES \n∑Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, today \nI wish to pay tribute to an outstanding Arkansas educator, Meghan Ables, who was named the 2016 Arkansas Teacher of the Year. In nearly 13 years of teaching, \nMeghan’s work in the classroom has made a difference in the lives of stu-dents in the Stuttgart School District. While she has taught a variety of sub-jects at Stuttgart High School, she currently serves as an English and journalism teacher. She has added reading and writing opportunities at the school by reestablishing its month-ly magazine, The Bird Banner, and helping launch its studio, Ricebird Tel-evision. \nMeghan challenges her students to \nuse their skills to improve their com-munity. Her journalism class partnered with Arkansas Children’s Hospital as well as the local police and fire depart-ments to raise awareness about safe driving. \nMeghan’s commitment to education \nalso inspires those who work with her to do their best to encourage further development in the classroom. She has led professional development activities for using literacy techniques in the classroom, presented for the Literacy Design Collaborative, LDC, and pro-vided Teacher Excellence and Support System, TESS, training to her col-leagues. \nThe Arkansas Teacher of the Year \nprogram, part of the National Teacher of the Year program, recognizes teach-ers around the State for their teaching excellence. This truly is a major ac-complishment in Meghan’s career and something for which she can be very proud. Her outstanding contributions to education, the Stuttgart School Dis-trict, and her students proves she is well deserving of this recognition. \nI would like to offer my congratula-\ntions to Meghan Ables for her deter-mination, devotion, and commitment to her students and to education. I am encouraged by her efforts to inspire our next generation of leaders and her drive to help them succeed. ∑ \nf \nTRIBUTE TO JOE SIMON, JR. \n∑Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, \ntoday I would like to honor a North Dakotan who is among the longest serving fire department volunteers in my State, keeping his community safe from fires and other threats for more than 65 years. That is a rare distinction in public service. The name Joe Simon, Jr., of Thompson, ND, has been on the volunteer firefighters’ roster since his high school days when his father was fire chief. \nJoe served for 36 years as the chief of \nthe Thompson Fire Department. Dur-ing that time, it was Joe’s responsi-bility to keep the department fully staffed, manage training and medical duties, and work on grants to help keep the department running. Though Joe has retired as chief, he is still actively involved with department, helping with monthly checks of equipment and going on fire calls. \nAccording to his friend, George \nHoselton, it was under Joe’s leadership that the Thompson Fire Department got its first set of the Jaws of Life res-\ncue system—a major purchase for a volunteer department. After a college student died in an accident along the highway near Thompson because no Jaws of Life were available, Joe led door-to-door fundraising efforts to buy the lifesaving equipment. The commu-nity, today comprised of just a thou-sand North Dakotans, contributed enough money that the Thompson Fire Department was able to purchase the Jaws of Life and a rescue vehicle need-ed to carry the Jaws of Life and other equipment, says George. And that is what Joe is best at: working hard, bringing folks together, and making his community safer. \nJoe’s volunteerism at the Thompson \nFire Department over more than 60 years has made the department a model for other communities around the State and country. Thompson Fire Department has taught classes to share its practices with other fire depart-ments in the region and has long led the way in improving its volunteers’ skills and safety. Under Joe’s leader-ship, the department secured one of the earliest automatic defibrillators in the State of North Dakota. Joe also helped get medical first response units up and running at other volunteer depart-ments in the region and was instru-mental in getting 911 and emergency first responder radio systems set up in Grand Forks County. Service is a way of life in Joe’s family. His wife, Sue, has been an EMT with the Thompson Fire Department for 27 years, which puts her in second place in seniority. \nAfter studying at the University of \nNorth Dakota, Joe has spent his life in Thompson helping to grow and support the community in many ways. For 36 years, he worked as the head of the Ag-ricultural Stabilization and Conserva-tion Service in Grand Forks. Outside of his firefighting duties, Joe has been ac-tively involved in American Legion baseball, Thompson High School foot-ball, and almost any other sporting event in town. Every Memorial Day, Joe puts out flags in nearby ceme-teries, and reads a list of the honored dead—all of the veterans buried at four cemeteries around Thompson. \nFriend and fellow firefighter George \nsays that Joe ‘‘gets the biggest smile on his face when he helps someone. That makes his day.’’ \nVolunteers make up 96 percent of \nNorth Dakota’s firefighters. They have other jobs but continue to give back, building stronger and safer commu-nities and supporting the very fabric of our State. North Dakotans know that each of us has to step in to help our family and neighbors during tough times, and our first responders know that better than most. It is North Da-kotans like Joe who epitomize why our State is such a unique and wonderful place filled with dedicated individuals who put others before themselves. \nThank you, Joe, for your tremendous \nservice to your community and for your tireless efforts to keep commu-nities throughout North Dakota safe. ∑ \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.025 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8683 December 15, 2015 \nTRIBUTE TO LIEUTENANT GEN-\nERAL HAROLD GREGORY ‘‘HAL’’ MOORE, JR. \n∑Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, today \nI wish to recognize retired LTG Harold ‘‘Hal’’ Moore of Auburn, AL, for his lifetime of service to the United States of America. \nLTG ‘‘Hal’’ Moore is best known as \nthe lieutenant colonel in command of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regi-\nment, at the Battle of Ia Drang, in 1965 during the Vietnam war and as the au-thor of ‘‘We Were Soldiers Once . . . and Young.’’ This book explores the weeklong Battle of Ia Drang where Hal served as the battalion commanding of-ficer and led his troops personally. It is a magnificent book evidencing his courage, leadership, brilliance, and that of his regiment. I read it years ago and have not forgotten it. \nEncircled by enemy soldiers and with \nno clear landing zone that would allow them to depart, Moore managed to per-severe despite overwhelming odds. Moore’s belief that ‘‘there is always one more thing you can do to increase your odds of success,’’ along with the courage of his entire command, are credited with this victory. Hal used the concepts of air assault organization and employment that he and his troop-ers learned during their time at Ft. Benning, GA, for the first time in ac-tual combat. \nMoore then took the lessons he \nlearned from this initial battle and helped instruct future troopers on how to better employ the tactic, saving countless lives going forward. During the Battle of Ia Drang, Moore was re-ferred to as ‘‘Yellow Hair’’ by his troops, for his blond hair, and as a tongue-in-cheek tribute referencing GEN George Armstrong Custer, com-mander of the same 7th Cavalry at the Battle of the Little Bighorn just under a century before. \nFor his actions, Hal was awarded the \nDistinguished Service Cross, the second highest military decoration of the U.S. Army. After the Battle of Ia Drang, Moore was promoted to colonel and subsequently took command of the 3rd Brigade, commonly referred to as the Garry Owen Brigade. \nAfter his service in the Vietnam war, \nMoore served in various assignments until his retirement from the Army, as a lieutenant general on August 1, 1977, after completing 32 years of active service. Today he remains an ‘‘hon-orary colonel’’ of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment. \nAlong with the book he wrote, Hal is \nremembered in the 2007 book written by his volunteer driver, ‘‘A General’s Spiritual Journey,’’ and in the 2013 bi-ography by author Mike Guardia, ‘‘Hal Moore: A Soldier Once . . . and Al-ways.’’ Moore has also been designated a Distinguished Graduate by the West Point Association of Graduates and has a 3-mile stretch of Highway 280 in Lee County, AL, named in his honor. \nLieutenant General Moore splits \ntime between Auburn, AL, and Crested Butte, CO. He continues to involve \nhimself in his community. I am proud to call LTG Harold ‘‘Hal’’ Moore a fel-low Alabamian and to acknowledge and celebrate his long and distinguished life. ∑ \nf \nMESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE \nENROLLED BILL SIGNED \nAt 2:15 p.m., a message from the \nHouse of Representatives, delivered by Mr. Novotny, one of its reading clerks, announced that the Speaker has signed the following enrolled bill: \nS. 808. An act to establish the Surface \nTransportation Board as an independent es-tablishment, and for other purposes. \nThe enrolled bill was subsequently \nsigned by the President pro tempore (Mr. H\nATCH ). \nAt 4:33 p.m., a message from the \nHouse of Representatives, delivered by Mrs. Cole, one of its reading clerks, an-nounced that pursuant to 36 U.S.C. 2302, and the order of the House of Jan-uary 6, 2015, the Speaker appoints the following Members on the part of the House of Representatives to the United States Holocaust Memorial Council: Mr. I\nSRAEL of New York and Mr. \nDEUTCH of Florida. \nf \nENROLLED BILL PRESENTED \nThe Secretary of the Senate reported \nthat on December 15, 2015, she had pre-sented to the President of the United States the following bill: \nS. 808. An act to establish the Surface \nTransportation Board as an independent es-tablishment, and for other purposes. \nf \nEXECUTIVE AND OTHER \nCOMMUNICATIONS \nThe following communications were \nlaid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and doc-uments, and were referred as indicated: \nEC–3904. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Naphthalene Acetates; Pesticide Tol-erances’’ (FRL No. 9937–22) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on De-cember 9, 2015; to the Committee on Agri-culture, Nutrition, and Forestry. \nEC–3905. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Choline Chloride; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance’’ (FRL No. 9936–50) received in the Office of the Presi-dent of the Senate on December 9, 2015; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. \nEC–3906. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Bacillus amyloliquefaciens MBI600 (antecedent Bacillus subtilis MBI600); Amendment to an Exemption from the Re-quirement of a Tolerance’’ (FRL No. 9939–54) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 9, 2015; to the Com-mittee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and For-\nestry. \nEC–3907. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Azoxystrobin; Tolerance Exemption’’ (FRL No. 9939–52) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 9, 2015; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nu-trition, and Forestry. \nEC–3908. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Review Group, Farm Service Agency, Department of Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ‘‘Highly Fractionated Indian Land (HFIL) Loan Program’’ (RIN0560–AI32) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 10, 2015; to the Com-mittee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and For-estry. \nEC–3909. A communication from the Asso-\nciate Administrator of the Fruit and Vege-table Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, Department of Agriculture, trans-mitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ‘‘Tomatoes Grown in Florida; De-creased Assessment Rate’’ (Docket No. AMS– FV–15–0058) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 9, 2015; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. \nEC–3910. A communication from the Fed-\neral Register Liaison Officer , Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Transition Assistance Program (TAP) for Military Personnel’’ (RIN0790– AJ17) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 10, 2015; to the Committee on Armed Services. \nEC–3911. A communication from the Asso-\nciate General Counsel for Legislation and Regulations, Office of Community Planning and Development , Department of Housing and Urban Development, transmitting, pur-suant to law, the report of a rule entitled ‘‘Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing: Defining ‘Chronically Homeless’’’ (RIN2506–AC37) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on De-cember 10, 2015; to the Committee on Bank-ing, Housing, and Urban Affairs. \nEC–3912. A communication from the Chief \nCounsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ‘‘Final Flood Elevation Deter-minations’’ ((44 CFR Part 67) (Docket No. FEMA–2015–0001)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 10, 2015; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. \nEC–3913. A communication from the Chief \nCounsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ‘‘Suspension of Community Eligibility’’ ((44 CFR Part 64) (Docket No. FEMA–2015–0001)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 10, 2015; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. \nEC–3914. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-\ntitled ‘‘Name Change from the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) to the Office of Land and Emergency Manage-ment (OLEM)’’ (FRL No. 9936–38–OSWER) re-ceived in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 9, 2015; to the Com-mittee on Environment and Public Works. \nEC–3915. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Imple-mentation Plans; Washington: Interstate \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.001 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8684 December 15, 2015 \nTransport of Ozone’’ (FRL No. 9940–05–Region \n10) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 9, 2015; to the Com-mittee on Environment and Public Works. \nEC–3916. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Imple-mentation Plans; Texas; El Paso Particulate Matter Contingency Measures’’ (FRL No. 9940–03–Region 6) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 9, 2015; to the Committee on Environment and Pub-lic Works. \nEC–3917. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmit-ting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule en-titled ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Maryland’s Negative Declaration for the Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings Control Techniques Guidelines’’ (FRL No. 9939–99–Region 3) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on De-cember 9, 2015; to the Committee on Environ-ment and Public Works. \nEC–3918. A communication from the Chief \nFinancial Officer, National Labor Relations Board, transmitting, pursuant to law, a re-port entitled ‘‘Performance and Account-ability Report for Fiscal Year 2015’’; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Gov-ernmental Affairs. \nEC–3919. A communication from the Sec-\nretary of Veterans Affairs, transmitting pro-posed legislation relative to major medical facility construction projects and major medical facility leases for fiscal year 2016; to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. \nEC–3920. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of Congressional Affairs, Nuclear Regu-latory Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ‘‘Ulti-mate Heat Sink for Nuclear Power Plants’’ (Regulatory Guide 1.27) received during ad-journment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 11, 2015; to the Committee on Environment and Pub-lic Works. \nEC–3921. A communication from the Assist-\nant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Depart-ment of State, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act (DDTC 15–117); to the Committee on Foreign Relations. \nEC–3922. A communication from the Direc-\ntor of Regulations Policy and Management Staff, Food and Drug Administration, De-partment of Health and Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ‘‘Listing of Color Additives Exempt from Certification; Mica-Based Pearlescent Pigments; Confirmation of Ef-fective Date’’ (Docket No. FDA–2015–C–1154) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on December 14, 2015; to the Com-\nmittee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. \nEC–3923. A communication from the Acting \nDirector, Office of Personnel Management, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Semi-annual Report of the Inspector General and the Management Response for the period from April 1, 2015 through September 30, 2015; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. \nEC–3924. A communication from the Sec-\nretary of the Treasury, transmitting, pursu-ant to law, the Semi-Annual Report of the Inspector General for the period from April 1, 2015 through September 30, 2015 and the Semi-Annual Report of the Treasury Inspec-tor General for Tax Administration (TIGTA); to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. \nEC–3925. A communication from the Ad-\nministrator, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the \nDepartment’s Semiannual Report from the Office of the Inspector General for the period from April 1, 2015 through September 30, 2015; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. \nEC–3926. A communication from the Acting \nDirector, Office of Personnel Management, the President’s Pay Agent, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to the ex-tension of locality based comparability pay-ments; to the Committee on Homeland Secu-rity and Governmental Affairs. \nEC–3927. A communication from the Acting \nDirector, Office of Personnel Management, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report enti-tled ‘‘National Security Professional Devel-opment Interagency Personnel Rotations 2nd Fiscal Year End Report on Performance Measures’’; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. \nf \nREPORTS OF COMMITTEES \nThe following reports of committees \nwere submitted: \nBy Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on \nHomeland Security and Governmental Af-fairs, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute: \nH.R. 998. A bill to establish the conditions \nunder which the Secretary of Homeland Se-curity may establish preclearance facilities, conduct preclearance operations, and provide customs services outside the United States, and for other purposes (Rept. No. 114–180). \nBy Mr. GRASSLEY, from the Committee \non the Judiciary, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute: \nS. 1169. A bill to reauthorize and improve \nthe Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Pre-vention Act of 1974, and for other purposes (Rept. No. 114–181). \nS. 1318. A bill to amend title 18, United \nStates Code, to provide for protection of maritime navigation and prevention of nu-clear terrorism, and for other purposes. \nf \nEXECUTIVE REPORTS OF \nCOMMITTEE \nThe following executive reports of \nnominations were submitted: \nBy Mr. M CCAIN for the Committee on \nArmed Services. \n*Gabriel Camarillo, of Texas, to be an As-\nsistant Secretary of the Air Force. \n*John E. Sparks, of Virginia, to be a Judge \nof the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces for the term of fifteen years to expire on the date prescribed by law. \n*Marcel John Lettre, II, of Maryland, to be \nUnder Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. \n*Navy nomination of Vice Adm. Kurt W. \nTidd, to be Admiral. \n*Nomination was reported with rec-\nommendation that it be confirmed sub-ject to the nominee’s commitment to respond to requests to appear and tes-tify before any duly constituted com-mittee of the Senate. \nf \nINTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND \nJOINT RESOLUTIONS \nThe following bills and joint resolu-\ntions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous con-sent, and referred as indicated: \nBy Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and \nMs. M URKOWSKI ): \nS. 2401. A bill to amend the Omnibus Crime \nControl and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to en-hance the COPS ON THE BEAT grant pro-\ngram, and for other purposes; to the Com-mittee on the Judiciary. \nBy Mr. M\nCCAIN (for himself, Ms. \nAYOTTE , Mr. B LUNT , and Mr. K IRK): \nS. 2402. A bill to require the Secretary of \nHomeland Security to search all public records to determine if an alien is inadmis-sible to the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary. \nBy Mr. BLUNT (for himself, Mrs. G\nILLI-\nBRAND , Mr. B URR, Ms. H IRONO , Mr. \nCOCHRAN , Ms. M IKULSKI , and Mr. \nBLUMENTHAL ): \nS. 2403. A bill to amend title 10, United \nStates Code, to provide a period for the relo-cation of spouses and dependents of certain members of the Armed Forces undergoing a permanent change of station in order to ease and facilitate the relocation of military fam-ilies, and for other purposes; to the Com-mittee on Armed Services. \nBy Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself and \nMr. M\nARKEY ): \nS. 2404. A bill to require the Federal Trade \nCommission to prescribe regulations regard-ing the collection and use of personal infor-mation obtained by tracking the online ac-tivity of an individual, and for other pur-poses; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. \nBy Mr. SCHUMER: \nS. 2405. A bill to require the disclosure of \ninformation concerning the manufacture of methamphetamine upon transfer or lease of covered housing; to the Committee on Bank-ing, Housing, and Urban Affairs. \nf \nSUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND \nSENATE RESOLUTIONS \nThe following concurrent resolutions \nand Senate resolutions were read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated: \nBy Mr. SCHUMER: \nS. Res. 335. A resolution supporting the \ngoals and ideals of National Aviation Main-tenance Technician Day, honoring the in-valuable contributions of Charles Edward Taylor, regarded as the father of aviation maintenance, and recognizing the essential role of aviation maintenance technicians in ensuring the safety and security of civil and military aircraft; to the Committee on Com-merce, Science, and Transportation. \nBy Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. \nM\nERKLEY ): \nS. Res. 336. A resolution honoring the Port-\nland Timbers as the champions of Major League Soccer in 2015; considered and agreed to. \nf \nADDITIONAL COSPONSORS \nS. 122 \nAt the request of Mr. M CCAIN, the \nname of the Senator from New Hamp-shire (Mrs. S\nHAHEEN ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 122, a bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to allow for the personal importation of safe and affordable drugs from ap-proved pharmacies in Canada. \nS. 233 \nAt the request of Mr. L EE, the name \nof the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. J\nOHNSON ) was added as a cosponsor of \nS. 233, a bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide com-pensatory time for employees in the private sector. \nS. 298 \nAt the request of Mr. G RASSLEY , the \nname of the Senator from Washington \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:59 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.004 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8685 December 15, 2015 \n(Ms. C ANTWELL ) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. 298, a bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act to provide States with the option of pro-viding services to children with medi-cally complex conditions under the \nMedicaid program and Children’s Health Insurance Program through a care coordination program focused on improving health outcomes for chil-dren with medically complex condi-tions and lowering costs, and for other purposes. \nS. 441 \nAt the request of Mr. P ERDUE , his \nname was added as a cosponsor of S. 441, a bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to clarify the Food and Drug Administration’s juris-diction over certain tobacco products, and to protect jobs and small busi-nesses involved in the sale, manufac-turing and distribution of traditional and premium cigars. \nS. 551 \nAt the request of Mrs. F EINSTEIN , the \nname of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. W\nYDEN ) was added as a cosponsor of S. \n551, a bill to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives li-censes to known or suspected dan-gerous terrorists. \nS. 740 \nAt the request of Mr. H ATCH , the \nname of the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. K\nLOBUCHAR ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 740, a bill to improve the coordination and use of geospatial data. \nS. 849 \nAt the request of Mr. I SAKSON , the \nname of the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. K\nLOBUCHAR ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 849, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for systematic data collection and analysis and epidemiological research regarding Multiple Sclerosis (MS), Par-kinson’s disease, and other neuro-logical diseases. \nS. 928 \nAt the request of Mrs. G ILLIBRAND , \nthe name of the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. B\nOOZMAN ) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. 928, a bill to reauthorize the World Trade Center Health Program and the September 11th Victim Com-pensation Fund of 2001, and for other purposes. \nS. 968 \nAt the request of Mrs. G ILLIBRAND , \nthe names of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. M\nENENDEZ ) and the Sen-\nator from Connecticut (Mr. M URPHY ) \nwere added as cosponsors of S. 968, a bill to require the Commissioner of So-cial Security to revise the medical and evaluation criteria for determining dis-ability in a person diagnosed with Hun-tington’s Disease and to waive the 24- month waiting period for Medicare eli-gibility for individuals disabled by Huntington’s Disease. \nS. 1041 \nAt the request of Mr. S ANDERS , the \nnames of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. MERKLEY ) and the Senator from Massa-\nchusetts (Mr. M ARKEY ) were added as \ncosponsors of S. 1041, a bill to elimi-nate certain subsidies for fossil-fuel production. \nS. 1152 \nAt the request of Mr. W HITEHOUSE , \nthe name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. M\nERKLEY ) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. 1152, a bill to make permanent the extended period of protections for members of uniformed services relating to mortgages, mortgage foreclosure, and eviction, and for other purposes. \nS. 1239 \nAt the request of Mr. D ONNELLY , the \nname of the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. B\nALDWIN ) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. 1239, a bill to amend the Clean Air Act with respect to the ethanol waiver for the Reid vapor pressure lim-itations under that Act. \nS. 1375 \nAt the request of Mr. D URBIN , the \nname of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. P\nETERS ) was added as a cosponsor \nof S. 1375, a bill to designate as wilder-ness certain Federal portions of the red rock canyons of the Colorado Plateau and the Great Basin Deserts in the State of Utah for the benefit of present and future generations of people in the United States. \nS. 1562 \nAt the request of Mr. W YDEN , the \nname of the Senator from Pennsyl-vania (Mr. C\nASEY ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 1562, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to re-form taxation of alcoholic beverages. \nS. 1697 \nAt the request of Ms. H EITKAMP , the \nname of the Senator from Montana (Mr. T\nESTER ) was added as a cosponsor \nof S. 1697, a bill to provide an exception from certain group health plan require-ments to allow small businesses to use pre-tax dollars to assist employees in the purchase of policies in the indi-vidual health insurance market, and for other purposes. \nS. 1715 \nAt the request of Mr. H OEVEN , the \nname of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. C\nARPER ) was added as a cosponsor \nof S. 1715, a bill to require the Sec-retary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the 400th anniver-sary of the arrival of the Pilgrims. \nS. 1830 \nAt the request of Mr. B ARRASSO , the \nname of the Senator from New Hamp-shire (Mrs. S\nHAHEEN ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 1830, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for the coverage of marriage and family therapist services and men-tal health counselor services under part B of the Medicare program, and for other purposes. \nS. 1831 \nAt the request of Mr. T OOMEY , the \nname of the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. H\nEINRICH ) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. 1831, a bill to revise section 48 of title 18, United States Code, and for other purposes. S. 1874 \nAt the request of Mr. H ATCH , the \nname of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. I\nNHOFE ) was added as a cosponsor \nof S. 1874, a bill to provide protections for workers with respect to their right to select or refrain from selecting rep-resentation by a labor organization. \nS. 1915 \nAt the request of Ms. A YOTTE , the \nname of the Senator from Colorado (Mr. G\nARDNER ) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. 1915, a bill to direct the Sec-retary of Homeland Security to make anthrax vaccines and antimicrobials available to emergency response pro-viders, and for other purposes. \nS. 1982 \nAt the request of Mr. C ARDIN , the \nname of the Senator from Alaska (Mr. S\nULLIVAN ) was added as a cosponsor of \nS. 1982, a bill to authorize a Wall of Re-membrance as part of the Korean War Veterans Memorial and to allow cer-tain private contributions to fund the Wall of Remembrance. \nS. 2044 \nAt the request of Mr. T HUNE , the \nname of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. W\nYDEN ) was added as a cosponsor of S. \n2044, a bill to prohibit the use of cer-tain clauses in form contracts that re-strict the ability of a consumer to com-municate regarding the goods or serv-ices offered in interstate commerce that were the subject of the contract, and for other purposes. \nS. 2109 \nAt the request of Mr. J OHNSON , the \nname of the Senator from New Hamp-shire (Ms. A\nYOTTE ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 2109, a bill to direct the Administrator of the Federal Emer-gency Management Agency to develop an integrated plan to reduce adminis-trative costs under the Robert T. Staf-ford Disaster Relief and Emergency As-sistance Act, and for other purposes. \nS. 2148 \nAt the request of Mr. W YDEN , the \nname of the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. H\nEINRICH ) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. 2148, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to prevent an increase in the Medicare part B premium and deductible in 2016. \nS. 2159 \nAt the request of Mr. P ERDUE , his \nname was added as a cosponsor of S. 2159, a bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to allow for great-er State flexibility with respect to ex-cluding providers who are involved in abortions. \nS. 2226 \nAt the request of Ms. A YOTTE , the \nnames of the Senator from New York (Mrs. G\nILLIBRAND ) and the Senator \nfrom Nevada (Mr. H ELLER ) were added \nas cosponsors of S. 2226, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to reau-thorize the residential treatment pro-grams for pregnant and postpartum women and to establish a pilot pro-gram to provide grants to State sub-stance abuse agencies to promote inno-\nvative service delivery models for such women. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.013 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8686 December 15, 2015 \nS. 2312 \nAt the request of Mr. T HUNE , the \nnames of the Senator from Iowa (Mrs. E\nRNST ), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. \nGRASSLEY ) and the Senator from Kan-\nsas (Mr. M ORAN ) were added as cospon-\nsors of S. 2312, a bill to amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act to make improvements to pay-ments for durable medical equipment under the Medicare and Medicaid pro-grams. \nS. 2321 \nAt the request of Mr. M ERKLEY , the \nname of the Senator from Pennsyl-vania (Mr. C\nASEY ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 2321, a bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 re-\ngarding reasonable break time for nursing mothers. \nS. 2325 \nAt the request of Ms. B ALDWIN , the \nname of the Senator from Alaska (Mr. S\nULLIVAN ) was added as a cosponsor of \nS. 2325, a bill to require the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Ad-ministrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to establish a constituent-driven program to provide a digital information plat-form capable of efficiently integrating coastal data with decision-support tools, training, and best practices and to support collection of priority coast-al geospatial data to inform and im-prove local, State, regional, and Fed-eral capacities to manage the coastal region, and for other purposes. \nS. 2361 \nAt the request of Mr. N ELSON , the \nname of the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. K\nLOBUCHAR ) was added as a co-\nsponsor of S. 2361, a bill to enhance air-port security, and for other purposes. \nS. 2377 \nAt the request of Mr. R EID, the name \nof the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. K\nLOBUCHAR ) was added as a cosponsor \nof S. 2377, a bill to defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and pro-tect and secure the United States, and for other purposes. \nS. RES. 148 \nAt the request of Mr. K IRK, the name \nof the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. S\nCHATZ ) was added as a cosponsor of S. \nRes. 148, a resolution condemning the Government of Iran’s state-sponsored persecution of its Baha’i minority and its continued violation of the Inter-national Covenants on Human Rights. \nS. RES. 326 \nAt the request of Mr. J OHNSON , the \nname of the Senator from North Caro-lina (Mr. B\nURR) was added as a cospon-\nsor of S. Res. 326, a resolution cele-brating the 135th anniversary of diplo-matic relations between the United States and Romania. SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS \nSENATE RESOLUTION 335—SUP-\nPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL AVIATION MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN DAY, HONORING THE INVALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF CHARLES EDWARD TAYLOR, REGARDED AS THE FATHER OF AVIATION MAINTENANCE, AND RECOG-NIZING THE ESSENTIAL ROLE OF AVIATION MAINTENANCE TECH-NICIANS IN ENSURING THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF CIVIL AND MILITARY AIRCRAFT \nMr. SCHUMER submitted the fol-\nlowing resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation: \nS. R ES. 335 \nWhereas the safety of the flying public is \nensured and the integrity of aircraft air-worthiness is personally guaranteed by indi-viduals who comprise the professional avia-tion maintenance technician workforce; \nWhereas professional aviation mainte-\nnance technicians are key members of the Armed Forces of the United States and help protect the United States through a strong Armed Forces aviation infrastructure; \nWhereas the duties of aviation mainte-\nnance technicians are critical to the home-land security of the United States and an in-tegral component of the aerospace industry of the United States; \nWhereas professional aviation mainte-\nnance technicians provide the strong infra-structure through which public confidence in the airborne transportation safety and mili-tary aviation strength of the United States is ensured; \nWhereas, in 1901, Charles Edward Taylor \nbegan working as a machinist for Orville and Wilbur Wright at the Wright Cycle Company in Dayton, Ohio; \nWhereas using only a metal lathe, drill \npress, and hand tools, Charles Edward Taylor built, in 6 weeks, the 12-horsepower engine that was used to power the first flying ma-chine of the Wright brothers; \nWhereas the ingenuity of Charles Edward \nTaylor earned him a place in aviation his-tory when the Wright brothers successfully flew their airplane in controlled flight on December 17, 1903; \nWhereas Charles Edward Taylor had a suc-\ncessful career in aviation maintenance for more than 60 years; \nWhereas Charles Edward Taylor was hon-\nored by the Federal Aviation Administration with the establishment of the Charles Ed-ward Taylor Master Mechanic Award, which recognizes individuals with not less than 50 years of aviation maintenance experience; \nWhereas Charles Edward Taylor has be-\ncome a hero to aircraft maintenance techni-cians worldwide; and \nWhereas 45 States, together with the com-\nmonwealths, territories, republics, and fed-erations of the United States, have already declared May 24 to be Aviation Maintenance Technician Day within their jurisdictions: Now, therefore, be it \nResolved, That the Senate— \n(1) supports National Aviation Mainte-\nnance Technician Day to honor the profes-sional men and women who ensure the safety and security of the airborne aviation infra-structure of the United States; and \n(2) recognizes the life and memory of \nCharles Edward Taylor, the aviation mainte-nance technician who built and maintained the engine that was used to power the first \ncontrolled flying machine of the Wright brothers on December 17, 1903. \nf \nSENATE RESOLUTION 336—HON-\nORING THE PORTLAND TIMBERS AS THE CHAMPIONS OF MAJOR LEAGUE SOCCER IN 2015 \nMr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. \nM\nERKLEY ) submitted the following res-\nolution; which was considered and agreed to: \nS. R ES. 336 \nWhereas on December 6, 2015, the Portland \nTimbers won the Major League Soccer Cup, the championship match of Major League Soccer; \nWhereas by defeating the Columbus Crew \nby a score of 2 to 1, the Portland Timbers won their first Major League Soccer cham-pionship and the 20th edition of the Major League Soccer Cup; \nWhereas Portland Timbers players Diego \nValeri and Rodney Wallace scored goals in the Major League Soccer Cup; \nWhereas Portland Timbers midfielder \nDiego Valeri was designated by Major League Soccer as the Most Valuable Player of the Major League Soccer Cup; \nWhereas the victory of the Portland Tim-\nbers in the Major League Soccer Cup was the first Major League Soccer championship win for Portland Timbers head coach, Caleb Por-ter, and Portland Timbers owner, Merritt Paulson; \nWhereas by doing charity work, the Port-\nland Timbers organization inspires the peo-ple of Portland, Oregon, both on the soccer field and in the community; \nWhereas the Timbers Army and the fans of \nthe Portland Timbers, who inspire and exem-plify Rose City pride by filling Providence Park with songs, scarves, flags, and confetti, and contributing to the community with charity work, are the best fans in Major League Soccer; and \nWhereas the success of the Portland Tim-\nbers soccer team will— \n(1) broaden an appreciation of athletics in \nyoung people; and \n(2) encourage Oregonians to volunteer in \ntheir communities: Now, therefore, be it \nResolved, That the Senate— \n(1) honors the Portland Timbers as the \nchampions of Major League Soccer in 2015; \n(2) recognizes the outstanding achievement \nof the Portland Timbers team, ownership, and staff; and \n(3) requests that the Secretary of the Sen-\nate prepare an enrolled copy of this resolu-tion for— \n(A) Portland Timbers owner Merritt \nPaulson; \n(B) Portland Timbers head coach Caleb \nPorter; and \n(C) Portland Timbers general manager \nGavin Wilkinson. \nf \nAMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND \nPROPOSED \nSA 2928. Mr. INHOFE (for Mrs. F EINSTEIN \n(for herself and Mr. R EED)) proposed an \namendment to the bill S. 571, to amend the Pilot’s Bill of Rights to facilitate appeals and to apply to other certificates issued by the Federal Aviation Administration, to re-quire the revision of the third class medical certification regulations issued by the Fed-eral Aviation Administration, and for other purposes. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.015 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8687 December 15, 2015 \nTEXT OF AMENDMENTS \nSA 2928. Mr. INHOFE (for Mrs. F EIN-\nSTEIN (for herself and Mr. R EED)) pro-\nposed an amendment to the bill S. 571, to amend the Pilot’s Bill of Rights to facilitate appeals and to apply to other certificates issued by the Federal Avia-tion Administration, to require the re-vision of the third class medical cer-tification regulations issued by the Federal Aviation Administration, and for other purposes; as follows: \nOn page 37, line 12, after the period, insert \nthe following: ‘‘I certify that I am not aware of any medical condition that, as presently treated, could interfere with the individual’s ability to safely operate an aircraft.’’. \nOn page 40, line 6, insert ‘‘and signed by \nthe physician’’ after ‘‘followed’’. \nOn page 48, between lines 3 and 4, insert \nthe following: \n(l) A\nUTHORITY TOREQUIRE ADDITIONAL IN-\nFORMATION .— \n(1) I N GENERAL .—If the Administrator re-\nceives credible or urgent information, in-cluding from the National Driver Register or the Administrator’s Safety Hotline, that re-flects on an individual’s ability to safely op-erate a covered aircraft under the third-class medical certificate exemption in subsection (a), the Administrator may require the indi-vidual to provide additional information or history so that the Administrator may de-termine whether the individual is safe to continue operating a covered aircraft. \n(2) U\nSE OF INFORMATION .—The Adminis-\ntrator may use credible or urgent informa-tion received under paragraph (1) to request an individual to provide additional informa-tion or to take actions under section 44709(b) of title 49, United States Code. \nf \nAUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO \nMEET \nCOMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES \nMr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unani-\nmous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on De-cember 15, 2015, at 9:30 a.m. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nCOMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS \nMr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unani-\nmous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 15, 2015, at 2:15 p.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ‘‘Afghani-stan Intelligence Assessment.’’ \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS ’ AFFAIRS \nMr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unani-\nmous consent that the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on De-cember 15, 2015, at 2:30 p.m., in room SR–418, of the Russell Senate Office Building. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nSELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE \nMr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unani-\nmous consent that the Select Com-mittee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 15, 2015, at 10 a.m. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR \nMr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unani-\nmous consent that LCDR Robert Donnell, a Coast Guard fellow with the Senate commerce committee, be grant-ed floor privileges for the remainder of the 114th Congress. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nEXECUTIVE SESSION \nEXECUTIVE CALENDAR \nMr. M CCONNELL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the Sen-ate proceed to executive session to con-sider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 378, 380, and 427 through 430. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nThereupon, the Senate proceeded to \nconsider the nominations en bloc. \nMr. M\nCCONNELL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the Sen-ate vote en bloc without intervening action or debate on the nominations in the order listed; that following disposi-tion of the nominations, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening ac-tion or debate; that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the R\nECORD ; \nthat the President be immediately no-tified of the Senate’s action and the Senate then resume legislative session. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there \nobjection? \nWithout objection, it is so ordered. The question is, Will the Senate ad-\nvise and consent to the nominations of Anthony Rosario Coscia, of New Jer-sey, to be a Director of the Amtrak Board of Directors for a term of five years; Derek Tai-Ching Kan, of Cali-fornia, to be a Director of the Amtrak Board of Directors for a term of five years; Dana J. Boente, of Virginia, to be United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia for the term of four years; Robert Lloyd Ca-pers, of New York, to be United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York for the term of four years; John P. Fishwick, Jr., of Virginia, to be United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia for the term of four years; and Emily Gray Rice, of New Hampshire, to be United States Attorney for the District of New Hampshire for the term of four years? \nThe nominations were confirmed en \nbloc. \nf \nLEGISLATIVE SESSION \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-\nate will now resume legislative session. \nf \nUNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREE-\nMENT—EXECUTIVE CALENDAR \nMr. M CCONNELL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the Sen-ate proceed to executive session to con-\nsider individually the following nomi-nations at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Democratic leader: Calendar Nos. 305, 306, 360, and 361; that there be 30 minutes for debate for each nomina-tion equally divided in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of time on the respective nomination, the Senate proceed to vote without inter-vening action or debate on the nomina-tion. Further, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that all judi-cial nominations received by the Sen-ate during the 114th Congress, first ses-sion, remain in status quo, notwith-standing the provisions of rule XXXI, paragraph 6, of the Standing Rules of the Senate. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there \nobjection? \nWithout objection, it is so ordered. Mr. M\nCCONNELL. For the informa-\ntion of our colleagues, it is my inten-tion to schedule each of these nomina-tions for floor consideration and a vote prior to the Presidents Day recess in February. \nf \nHONORING THE PORTLAND TIM-\nBERS AS THE CHAMPIONS OF MAJOR LEAGUE SOCCER IN 2015 \nMr. M\nCCONNELL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the Sen-ate proceed to the immediate consider-ation of S. Res. 336, submitted earlier today. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The \nclerk will report the resolution by title. \nThe bill clerk read as follows: \nA resolution (S. Res. 336) honoring the \nPortland Timbers as the champions of Major League Soccer in 2015. \nThere being no objection, the Senate \nproceeded to consider the resolution. \nMr. M CCONNELL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that the reso-lution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to recon-sider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nThe resolution (S. Res. 336) was \nagreed to. \nThe preamble was agreed to. (The resolution, with its preamble, is \nprinted in today’s R\nECORD under ‘‘Sub-\nmitted Resolutions.’’) \nf \nORDERS FOR WEDNESDAY, \nDECEMBER 16, 2015 \nMr. M CCONNELL. Mr. President, I \nask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 11 a.m., Wednesday, De-cember 16; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of pro-ceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; further, that \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE6.010 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8688 December 15, 2015 \nfollowing leader remarks, the Senate \nbe in a period of morning business until 6 p.m., with Senators permitted to \nspeak therein for up to 10 minutes each. \nThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without \nobjection, it is so ordered. \nf \nADJOURNMENT UNTIL 11 A.M. \nTOMORROW \nMr. M CCONNELL. If there is no fur-\nther business to come before the Sen-ate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous \norder. \nThere being no objection, the Senate, \nat 7:06 p.m., adjourned until Wednes-day, December 16, 2015, at 11 a.m. \nf \nCONFIRMATIONS \nExecutive nominations confirmed by \nthe Senate December 15, 2015: \nAMTRAK BOARD OF DIRECTORS \nANTHONY ROSARIO COSCIA, OF NEW JERSEY, TO BE A \nDIRECTOR OF THE AMTRAK BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS. DEREK TAI–CHING KAN, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE A DI-\nRECTOR OF THE AMTRAK BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS. \nDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE \nDANA J. BOENTE, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE UNITED STATES \nATTORNEY FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA FOR THE TERM OF FOUR YEARS. \nROBERT LLOYD CAPERS, OF NEW YORK, TO BE UNITED \nSTATES ATTORNEY FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FOR THE TERM OF FOUR YEARS. \nJOHN P. FISHWICK, JR., OF VIRGINIA, TO BE UNITED \nSTATES ATTORNEY FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIR-GINIA FOR THE TERM OF FOUR YEARS. \nEMILY GRAY RICE, OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, TO BE UNITED \nSTATES ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMP-SHIRE FOR THE TERM OF FOUR YEARS. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:16 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 9801 E:\\CR\\FM\\G15DE6.052 S15DEPT1smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS\n∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.\nMatter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor.CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1787 December 15, 2015 \nCONGRATULATING GOV. TERRY \nBRANSTAD ON BECOMING THE LONGEST-SERVING GOVERNOR IN AMERICAN HISTORY \nHON. PAUL D. RYAN \nOF WISCONSIN \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, on \nbehalf of the whole House, I extend heartfelt congratulations to Governor Terry Branstad on his 7,642nd day in office. He is now the long-est-serving governor in American history. And this day of recognition comes not a moment too soon because his principled leadership is a model for us all. \nOver the course of his 21 years in office, he \nhas helped the people of Iowa overcome enor-mous challenges. He inherited a budget def-icit; he now presides over a large surplus. When he came in, the state economy had gone bust; now it is booming. And through good times and bad, he has always stood four-square behind his values. \nPeople say he is good at retail politics, and \nthat is certainly true. But his success is more than a testament to his skill. It is a testament to his devotion. Governor Branstad knows that a true public servant lives among the people. He visits all 99 counties of Iowa every year. He can tell you the ins and outs of everything in Iowa—from soybeans to livestock to insur-ance. He goes to every small event in every small town because he wants to be there. He listens because he cares. \nAsked what he wants his legacy to be, Gov-\nernor Branstad has said he wants Iowa to be a place where young people want to stay— where there is opportunity for all. I could think of no better goal for every governor in the country. \nI also think it is fitting that the long-serving \ngovernor whose record he has surpassed was George Clinton, a man who left his state to become vice president. For Governor Branstad, national office would have been a step down. He knows his state. He loves his state. The people of Iowa are grateful for his service. I’m grateful for his friendship. And all of us in the House are grateful for his exam-ple. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO BILL AND MARILYN \nRYAN \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate Bill and Marilyn Ryan of Council Bluffs, Iowa, on the very special occasion of their 65th wedding anniversary. They were married in 1950. \nBill and Marilyn’s lifelong commitment to \neach other and their children, Laura, Mary, Jane, Nancy, Anne, and Carol, truly embodies \nour Iowa values. It is families like the Ryan family that make me proud to call myself an Iowan and represent the people of our great state. \nMr. Speaker, I commend this great couple \non their 65th year together and I wish them many more. I ask that my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives join me in congratulating them on this momentous occasion. \nf \nPERSONAL EXPLANATION \nHON. LYNN A. WESTMORELAND \nOF GEORGIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, on \nDecember 11, 2015, the House of Represent-atives considered the Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 644, the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015. Regret-tably, due to a family commitment I was un-able to cast my vote on this legislation. Had I been present, I would have voted yes on the Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 644, the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015. \nf \nIN SUPPORT OF OUR CLOSE \nPARTNER TAIWAN \nHON. SCOTT DesJARLAIS \nOF TENNESSEE \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. D ESJARLAIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today \nto highlight the positive steps that our close partner and friend Taiwan has taken in the South China Sea. \nOn December 12, 2015, the Taiwanese gov-\nernment inaugurated a newly constructed lighthouse and renovated wharf on the Taiping Island, which is the largest natural island of the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea and has been administered by Taiwan since 1946. This infrastructure project will help sup-port free and safe passage of ships through the surrounding waters, further enabling Tai-wan to offer humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and provide emergency rescue support to passing vessels. \nLike the United States, Taiwan is a firm be-\nliever in freedom of navigation rights and has actively worked to promote peace and pros-perity throughout the South China Sea region. Earlier this year, Taiwan President Ma Ying- jeou proposed the South China Sea Peace Ini-tiative, reiterating their government’s long-standing position of shelving disputes and pro-moting joint resource development in these contested waters. \nOver the years, Taiwan has continued to \nplay a responsible and peaceful role in the re-gion and as such, I urge my colleagues to join me in working with our Taiwanese partners to \npromote our common interests and uphold international law. \nf \nHONORING CHIEF MASTER \nSERGEANT JOHN FRANCIS DITRO \nHON. JOHN KATKO \nOF NEW YORK \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. KATKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nhonor the career of Chief Master Sergeant John F. Ditro who will retire from the United States Air Force on December 31, 2015. Chief Master Sergeant Ditro has more than 27 years of combined military service in the United States Navy, the United States Air Force, and the New York Air National Guard. \nChief Ditro entered the United States Navy \nthrough the delayed enlistment program in May of 1982 and was called up to active duty in July of that year. In January of 1983, he was assigned to the United States Naval Sta-tion Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, working on truck diesel engines and aviation fuel pumps in support of the Aviation Fuels Division. \nAfter a brief stint in the naval reserves, \nChief Ditro re-enlisted in the United States Navy in March of 1986. He was stationed aboard the Caloosahatchee and in March of \n1988, Chief Ditro was released from the United States Navy. Chief Ditro then began working as a civilian accountant at the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base and in 1994 he joined the Pennsylvania Air National Guard as a Combat Communications technician. In Au-gust of 1995 Chief Ditro accepted a position with the New York Air National Guard working as a Command and Control Battle Manage-ment Operations specialist in the Northeast Air Defense Sector. Chief Ditro was activated on September 11, 2001 after the attack on the World Trade Center. \nIn June of 2002, Chief Ditro transferred to \nthe 174th Fighter Wing located at Hancock Field Air National Guard Base in Syracuse, New York. Chief Ditro was named the Finan-cial Management Superintendent in 2003; under Chief Ditro’s management, the financial services office was named the Financial Serv-ices Office of the Year in 2008. In June of 2010, Chief Ditro accepted the challenge to become the first Operations Support Squadron Superintendent leading the charge to assist the Operations Group in all missions as the Chief of Intelligence. \nChief Master Sergeant Ditro’s major awards \nand decorations include: Meritorious Service Medal, Air Force Commendation Medal with 2 Devices, Air Force Achievement Medal, Meri-torious Unit Award, Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, Air Force Organizational Excellence Award, Coast Guard Meritorious Unit Com-mendation, Combat Readiness Medal with 2 Devices, Navy Good Conduct Medal, Air Re-serve Forces Meritorious Service Medal with 6 Devices, National Defense Service Medal with \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.001 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1788 December 15, 2015 \n1 Device, Global War on Terrorism Expedi-\ntionary Medal, Global War on Terrorism Serv-ice Medal, Humanitarian Service Medal, Navy and Marine Corp Overseas Service Ribbon, Air Force Expeditionary Service Ribbon with Gold Border, Air Force Longevity with 5 De-vices, Armed Forces Reserve Medal with 3 ‘‘M’’ Devices, New York Recruiting Medal, New York Humane Service to New York State Medal, New York Air National Guard Out-standing Enlisted Leader of the Year Ribbon, and New York Defense of Liberty award. \nChief Ditro has served his country honorably \nand for that he has my utmost respect. I want to thank him for his dedication, loyalty, and service to his country. I wish Chief Ditro the best and I hope that he enjoys his retirement with his wife Sandy and his two sons, Jason and Joshua. \nf \nCONGRATULATING LOCAL \nLEADERS IN COCHISE COUNTY \nHON. MARTHA McSALLY \nOF ARIZONA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMs. M CSALLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to con-\ngratulate local leaders in Cochise County, KE&G construction, and Cemex for their out-standing work on the Palominas Flood Protec-tion and Groundwater Recharge project. This project is the first-ever aquifer protection and recharge effort of its kind implemented at a re-gional scale, and aims to protect flows of a desert river and its lush streamside habitat while also replenishing the water supplies of local residents. The Palominas project em-bodies the values of the residents of Cochise County who not only want to ensure protection of our waterways and natural resources, but are looking for solutions to provide more eco-nomic opportunity. One-size-fits-all require-ments from Washington fail to take into ac-count Arizona’s unique landscapes, but the formation of local partnerships allowed the community to come together to create a solu-tion to benefit all, including the citizens, busi-nesses, and native plants and animals. \nThis project received top state and local \nhonors in Arizona and was recognized inter-nationally for offering a long-term solution to the recurring problem of sheet flow flooding at a local elementary school and the need for aq-uifer recharge. The project includes a 17 mil-lion gallon detention basin that holds storm water runoff, as well as dry wells and infiltra-tion trenches covering 290 acres. These dry wells and infiltration trenches provide addi-tional storage capacity during storms, reduce the loss of water through evaporation, and in-crease the amount of water recharged into the nearby San Pedro River. \nDennis Donovan, a civil engineer over-\nseeing the project for Cochise County told the Arizona Republic that the project includes the large detention basin with berms to slowly steer the water into a wide channel before spilling over four foot walls that ‘‘slow down the storm water to where, to the best it can, it (sinks and) recharges.’’ The water control mechanisms in the basin keep storm water from washing through in a day leaving the basin dry again the next. \nThe Sierra Vista Herald noted that, \n‘‘CEMEX’s Sierra Vista Plant joined forces with KE&G Construction to complete the \nproject within a three-month time frame. Work-ing through more than two inches of rainfall, these dynamic teams beat the heaviest rains of the summer monsoon season.’’ \nThe health of the San Pedro River is impor-\ntant to Fort Huachuca and the vitality of the surrounding community. Projects like these help to protect the future of the San Pedro River and demonstrate the commitment of the Army and the community to preserving their natural environment. \nf \nHONORING LAW ENFORCEMENT \nOFFICERS IN VIRGINIA’S 10TH DISTRICT \nHON. BARBARA COMSTOCK \nOF VIRGINIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today \nto recognize the following law enforcement personnel who have recently been honored at the 11th Annual Law Enforcement Apprecia-tion Dinner in my district for their invaluable service and commitment to our communities. I submit the following excerpts from a speech delivered by Mr. Jim Wink, who spoke at this event in the fall. This year’s honorees are Offi-cer Dustin Bowers of the Mount Weather Po-lice Department, Officer William McCann of the Northwestern Regional Adult Detention Center, Deputy Shane Jewell of the Clarke County Sheriff’s Office, Deputy Mackenzie Carter of the Winchester City Sheriff’s Office, Deputy Aaron Jeter of the Frederick County Sheriff’s Office, Laura Patten of the Berryville Police Department, Corporal Richie Lewis O’Connor of Winchester Police Department, Trooper Terry Hilliker of the Virginia Depart-ment of State Police, and DEA Special Agent Thomas Hickey of the Northwest Virginia Re-gional Drug Task Force. \nOfficer Dustin Bowers has continually dis-\nplayed the highest degree of competence, es-prit de corps, and dedication to the mission at Mount Weather. He routinely goes above and beyond to perform his duties as a police officer, and in doing so, improves the Mount Weather department. Officer Bowers, with-out hesitation, took on the responsibility of serving as the field training officer for new officers. This year, Officer Bowers was se-lected to attend the federal law enforcement training center’s active shooter instructor course. Since completing the course, Officer Bowers has worked to improve the depart-ment’s capability to respond to an active shooter incident. He is currently developing an active shooter training program for Mount Weather emergency operation center employees focused on teaching them how to react to shooting incidents in the work place and other public locations. Officer Bowers also, through his own initiative, researched and proposed new equipment that the depart-ment purchased, which improved police offi-cer readiness at all levels. Mount Weather Police Department can think of no finer offi-cer more deserving of recognition. \nOfficer William McCann is the head of the \nfield training officer program, a CPR in-structor, training officer, and constant men-tor at the detention center in Winchester. He has been nominated and will be the recipient of two life-saving awards. In addition to these two critical incidents, Officer McCann’s impact is present on a daily basis. He is one of the most respected and influen-tial staff members in the detention center \nwhich accounts for nearly 200 employees. Of-ficer McCann’s wealth of knowledge comes from over 20 years of experience in the Mary-land department of corrections where he served as a lieutenant. \nDeputy Shane Jewell joined the Clarke \nCounty Sheriff’s Office in 2009. He is a re-spected instructor at the Rappahannock Re-gional Criminal Justice Academy, where he teaches defensive tactics. Deputy Jewell sup-ports the mission of this office and is the epitome of a team player. Deputy Jewell’s hard work and dedication to the Clarke County community is valuable. \nDeputy Mackenzie Carter joined the Win-\nchester City Sheriff’s Office only a year ago; however, in a short time, she has displayed her dedication to the office and her team. She exerts a strong ability to assist others and volunteers for extra duties at the sher-iff’s office. Deputy Carter has the willingness to take on difficult projects and see them to \na successful completion, which has repeat-edly impressed the sheriff over the past year. Deputy Carter has also shown that she is dedicated to going above and beyond in serv-ing her community. She has participated in and started several community-based fund-raising events and community service incen-tives, such as the CCAP food drive, Evans Home for Children food drive, the Winchester Literacy Foundation summer reading pro-gram. \nWhile on patrol one evening, Deputy Aaron \nJeter, observed a speeding violator. He made the decision to stop the vehicle for the viola-tion. With the assistance from other depu-ties; Deputy Jeter was able to recover a large amount of heroin from under the vehi-cle. The total amount seized from the traffic stop was 261 individual packets of heroin and over $400.00 in cash. Following this seizure, Deputy Jeter continued his increased effort to combat the local heroin epidemic, which plagues our community. Deputy Jeter’s work against the local heroin problem is truly noteworthy. The efforts of deputies, like Aaron Jeter, will help curb the amount of heroin related overdoses and deaths, which our community has recently faced. Deputy Jeter’s outstanding work with these cases makes him a worthy and deserving candidate for this year’s HSCBA award. \nLaura Patten serves the Berryville Police \nDepartment as the sole civilian employee in the capacity of administrative assistant. She began working for the department in August of 1989 and is looking forward to her upcom-ing retirement in 2016. Early in her career she served as a crossing guard making sure the children of the community made their way safely to school and back home. In the office, Laura keeps the flow of communica-tion working between the community and of-ficers in the field. Indeed, she is the face and voice of the department working the front desk and answering the phones. It is often an under-appreciated function that Laura pro-vides to the department. Berryville PD Chief Neal White states he is very thankful that she is getting the credit she truly deserves. \nCorporal Richie Lewis of Winchester re-\nsponded to a violent kidnapping last year that involved a male holding a knife to the throat of a female. Lewis helped to neu-tralize the situation with the help of his team. Upon seeing the officers the suspect became agitated, so the officers withdrew from the building out of fear the suspect would harm the female. When the suspect shut the hall door Cpl. Lewis reentered the building and snuck up to the landing on the third floor. While Cpl. Lewis was approach-ing the landing, with gun drawn, the suspect reopened the door. Out of fear of shooting the female Cpl. Lewis transitioned from his pistol to his Taser. When the suspect gave \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE8.003 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1789 December 15, 2015 \nCpl. Lewis an opening between the female’s \nbody and his own, Cpl. Lewis was able to shoot the suspect with his Taser and inca-pacitate him, bringing the situation to a quick and effective resolution. \nTrooper Hilliker handles all traffic and \ncriminal matters with professionalism and personal pride. He continues to take on the extra responsibility of being an explosive K–9 handler on top of his other duties. Troop-er Hilliker’s dedication to the department and the citizens it serves is unmatched. 2001– 2002 Winchester Police Department, 1997–1999 Muskego Police Department Muskego, WI. Terry Hilliker served as a member of the Winchester and Muskego Police Depart-ments as a patrolman where he was tasked with a multitude of responsibilities and chal-lenges when working in local law enforce-ment. The experience Terry learned during this time is evident in his current role as a trooper. Terry Hilliker started his service re-lated professions with the United States Ma-rine Corps (1976–1996). He served in various command, staff and administrative billets from the platoon, company, and battalion levels to the regimental, brigade, and divi-sion level. Terry retired from the Marine Corps with the rank of lieutenant colonel. \nDEA Special Agent Thomas Hickey is a \ncontributing member of the Northwest Vir-ginia Regional Drug Task Force and assists members of the force with numerous nar-cotics cases annually. Special Agent Hickey has been and continues to be a major sup-porting federal entity essential to fighting the current heroin epidemic. Special Agent Hickey has been instrumental in numerous local heroin cases by providing intelligence information, identifying major Baltimore, Maryland heroin suppliers and arresting and prosecuting large scale Baltimore heroin dis-tributors who have plagued our commu-nities. Special Agent Hickey is a dedicated law enforcement professional who believes in the working relationships between state, local and federal law enforcement agencies. He continues to provide an expert element to the drug task force that is necessary in com-bating the drug epidemics that plague our communities. Special Agent Hickey responds to active drug overdoses and assists agents by providing support and advice. He prefers to be involved in local drug cases from the beginning, and often responds to and assists local agents at all hours of the day and night. In 2014 special Agent Hickey initiated, investigated, and prosecuted fourteen large scale federal heroin investigations all of which were directly related to the Win-chester, Frederick and Clarke county com-munities. \nf \nTAIWAN’S PEACE INITIATIVE IN \nTHE TAIPING ISLAND OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA \nHON. DONALD M. PAYNE, JR. \nOF NEW JERSEY \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ex-\npress my sincere appreciation for the Republic of China (Taiwan) recent leadership and initia-tive in pursuing long-term peace and stability in the South China Sea. \nIn December 2015, a U.S. State Department \nofficial expressed that all claimants should work to reduce regional tensions. \nI encourage all relevant countries to resolve \nmaritime disputes in accordance with inter-national laws and regulations, including the United Nations Charter and UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). I especially \ntake note of Taiwan’s willingness to work with other parties concerned, through consultations conducted on the basis of equality and reci-procity, to jointly ensure peace and stability in the South China Sea, to uphold the freedom of navigation and overflight, and to conserve and develop resources in the region. \nTaiping Island is the largest natural and self- \nsustainable island in Spratly Islands. This is-land qualifies as an island according to the UNCLOS. Taiwan has set up a hospital in Taiping Island. Over the past decade, this hospital has offered humanitarian assistance to 21 people in 20 cases, including 12 Phil-ippine and Myanmar nationals, which fully demonstrates Taiwan’s dedication to humani-tarianism. \nf \nCOMMEMORATING TROY’S 60TH \nANNIVERSARY \nHON. DAVID A. TROTT \nOF MICHIGAN \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. TROTT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nrecognize the 60th anniversary of the city of Troy, Michigan. Troy has always been a com-munity of opportunity. \nThe township of Troy became a home rule \ncity in 1955 after the introduction of commer-cial and industrial development led to tremen-dous growth in the post-World War II period. Since 1955, Troy has witnessed a myriad of changes including the construction of I–75, the explosion of growth on Big Beaver Road, as well as thriving residential neighborhoods. \nThese achievements have not gone unno-\nticed. Troy is consistently rated as one of the safest cities in Michigan, best places to raise a family, and most recently, one of the happiest places in America. \nNone of these things would be possible \nwithout the thousands of city residents that strive each day to improve their community and take care of their families. It is to you, the residents of Troy that I say thank you for the privilege of representing you in Congress and congratulations to Troy for sixty prosperous years, with many more to come. \nf \nRECOGNIZING THE MARSHALL \nCHRISTIAN ACADEMY TCAL DIVI-SION II STATE FOOTBALL CHAM-PIONS \nHON. LOUIE GOHMERT \nOF TEXAS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, for more than \ntwenty five years, Marshall Christian Academy has been providing Christian based education to students whose families desire them to have a solid foundation in academics and ath-letics, while developing excellence and Christ- centered character. It is a great honor to rec-ognize the Marshall Christian Academy Guard-ians on their most recent accomplishment, capturing the Texas Christian Athletic League Division II 6-man Football State Championship title. \nMarshall Christian Academy takes pride in \nworking on the A, B, and Cs—attitude, behav-ior, and conduct, in both academics and ath-\nletics. The school website states, ‘‘At Marshall Christian Academy, we play Six-Man Football to work in the character of Christ to our young men. God has blessed us with the opportunity to play the great game of football. Six-Man is an effective tool for developing young men in discipleship and training them in the game of life—how to play a game, how to be tough and how to represent Jesus Christ on and off the field.’’ \nThe team fought and overcame a number of \nobstacles before claiming the state title, prov-ing once again they are champions in every sense of the word. Their season was riddled with lengthy travel, inclement weather, ill-nesses, and a devastating car accident which seriously injured two team members and claimed the life of a family member. But through it all, the Guardians relied on the power of prayer to persevere and emerge tri-umphant, resulting in a season culminating in their first ever state football championship with a 36–28 win over Annapolis Christian Acad-emy. \nThe Marshall Christian Academy Guardians \nachieving this landmark accomplishment in-clude David Florence, Stephan Florence, Wil-liam Hency, Ryan Stokell, Aslan Bell, Andrew Stokell, Dylan Alford, Hunter Cagle, Dazmond Lewis, Noah Heredia, Caleb Beesinger and Matthew Stokell. \nCongratulations should be extended to the \ndedicated faculty and staff members who so skillfully created the solid foundation of direc-tion and motivation necessary to build a team of champions: Marshall Christian Academy Administrators Raymond Bade, Duane Schultz and Guy Barr III, along with the Guardians’ athletic staff comprised of Head Coach Guy Barr III, along with Assistant Coaches Jeff Arrington, Tyrone Robinson and Robert Stokell. \nMay God continue to bless their efforts so \nthey may one day dedicate their drive and de-termination to help make this great country even stronger. My most enthusiastic and heartfelt congratulations to the Marshall Chris-tian Academy Guardians, as their legacy is now recorded in the C\nONGRESSIONAL RECORD \nwhich will endure as long as there is a United States of America. \nf \nREFLECTING ON THE RECOVERY \nOF THE NORTHERN MARIANA IS-LANDS SINCE TYPHOON SOUDELOR \nHON. GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO \nSABLAN \nOF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, on the night of \nAugust 2nd and through the early morning of August 3rd this year, Typhoon Soudelor lashed through the Northern Mariana Islands, causing widespread destruction to homes, businesses, and infrastructure, uprooting the lives of the people I represent here in Con-gress. \nToday, I want to reflect on that event, and \non the exceptional grace and generosity that have made recovery possible. \nThe typhoon’s impact was especially grave \non Saipan, the most populated island in the \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE8.005 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1790 December 15, 2015 \nNorthern Marianas. Soudelor rendered hun-\ndreds of families homeless overnight. It also decimated infrastructure—knocking out power and water systems, shutting down the ports, ravaging the college, schools and other public buildings. \nSurvival is a way of life in our islands. We \nare accustomed to bracing ourselves through tropical storms and picking ourselves up when skies clear. But the sheer ferocity of Typhoon Soudelor caught us all off-guard. Even the Na-tional Weather Service failed to foresee the force of this storm. \nThat there was no loss of life is testament \nto the resilience and resourcefulness of our people. And we are grateful to Providence for sparing us. \nAs long as we live, those of us who experi-\nenced Soudelor will not forget the wreckage we saw the morning after. Nor will we forget the hardship that followed, the long hours in line for food and fuel and other necessities, the days of physical suffering and distress, the weeks without power and running water. \nSoudelor tested our infrastructure, our gov-\nernment, and our capacity as a community to deal with disaster. \nNow, however, four months after the storm, \nI can report that conditions are greatly im-proved, since that long and terrifying night in August. \nElectricity is restored, and residents have \ndaily water service. Streets have been cleaned in our villages and commercial districts. Stu-dents are in school. Businesses have re-opened. Workers are employed again. Fami-lies are putting their lives back together. \nThough there is still much to reconstruct \nand strengthen to be better prepared and more resilient than before, it is remarkable how far we have come on the road to recov-ery. \nSo, today, I want to thank all those who \ncontributed to this successful response to ad-versity. There are so many individuals and or-ganizations. It is not possible for me to know and name each and every one. Their collec-tive efforts prove how much can be done, when people work together towards a com-mon goal. \nFirst we thank the American people, who \ngave without hesitation to fellow citizens in need. When all is said and done, American taxpayers will have contributed an estimated 100 million dollars in federal disaster aid to feed those who had no food, shelter those who lost their homes, repair residences and replace lost property, reopen shops and return the economy to life, revive the power and water systems. In doing all this, they gave us the hope that we needed to work our way to recovery. \nWe thank President Barack Obama and \nGovernor Eloy Inos for their leadership in en-suring the prompt availability of resources to address the state of disaster in the Northern Marianas. \nWe thank the Federal Emergency Manage-\nment Agency team, led by Federal Coordi-nating Officer Stephen De Blasio. FEMA’s col-laborative spirit set the tone for the response, working with other federal agencies and re-sponders to aid the thousands of typhoon sur-vivors. \nWe thank our U.S. service members, who \nmobilized quickly to produce and distribute drinking water, clear debris, clean up fuel spills, and transport critical supplies and equipment. We thank our Commonwealth emergency \nmanagement crews, utility workers, police offi-cers and firefighters, healthcare professionals, educators, and other local government em-ployees, who answered the call to serve even as their own families were picking up the pieces of their shattered homes and lives. \nWe thank our local businesses, shuttered by \nthe storm, who nevertheless rallied together to raise funds for the recovery effort. \nWe thank the legions of volunteers—of all \nages, all religions and races, many survivors themselves—who came forward to share food, water, clothing, shelter, and comfort with their fellow human beings. \nAnd we thank our friends from throughout \nthe Pacific region, and indeed throughout the world, for sending supplies, expertise, and equipment by air and by sea to help us back on our feet. \nToday, the marks of Typhoon Soudelor are \nstill to be seen in homes and businesses yet to be repaired, debris yet to be removed. But beneath these physical scars, a new strength is arising. \nA new community-based working group \nknown as CARE—the Commonwealth Advo-cates for Recovery Efforts—has emerged. The people in CARE—from all walks of life, private and public sector, formal and informal organi-zations—are committed to rebuilding our is-land home so that it is stronger and better than before. \nWith this newborn spirit of hope, coopera-\ntion and interdependence I am confident that we will succeed. \nf \nRECOGNIZING THE 60TH YEAR OF \nDESEGREGATION OF THE CITY OF MEMPHIS FIRE DEPARTMENT \nHON. STEVE COHEN \nOF TENNESSEE \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nrecognize the 60th year of desegregation of the City of Memphis Fire Department. On July 11, 1955, twelve African American men were recruited to join the Memphis Fire Department and were assigned to Fire Station No. 8 lo-cated at E.H. Crump and Mississippi Boule-vards. They were: Robert Crawford; Carl Stotts; Floyd Newsum; Norvell Wallace; George Dumas; John Copper; William Carter; Leon Parsons; Richard Burns; Lawrence Yates; Leroy Johnson; and Murray Pugues. Like many African Americans who worked to break the barriers erected by Jim Crow era laws, there were many challenges to being the first to integrate the fire department, but their love for the city of Memphis and desire to keep citizens safe from harm helped them to overcome the challenges with the highest lev-els of determination and professionalism. \nFor many years following integration, racial \ndifferences dictated how African American fire-fighters responded to fires. In his book ‘‘Black Fire: Portrait of a Black Memphis Firefighter,’’ Robert Crawford recalled how the twelve men were required to wait outside homes belonging to white residents until after the Captain in-spected the home to ensure any woman present was appropriately dressed. When re-sponding to fires at residences belonging to African Americans, the twelve were allowed to enter and investigate alongside their white col-\nleagues. Crawford also recounted the chal-lenges he and others faced when working with firefighters from other firehouses around the city, obtaining information on fighting fires and in being considered for promotions. \nFire Station No. 8 became well-known for its \ncrews’ perseverance, work ethic and bravery in the line of duty. Over time, other fire com-panies became open to working with the men, which led to the full integration of the Memphis Fire Department. This was, however, not with-out resistance from some within the depart-ment who were opposed to such change, even into the 1980s when some of the twelve men had been promoted to high ranks. By the time of their retirements, they had achieved the ranks of: Robert Crawford—Deputy Direc-tor of the Memphis Fire Department; Carl Stotts—Deputy Chief; Floyd Newsum—Divi-sion Chief; Norvell Wallace—Assistant Fire Marshal; George Dumas—Battalion Com-mander; John Copper—Captain; William Car-ter—Fire Inspector; Leon Parsons—Lieuten-ant; Richard Burns—Private; and Lawrence Yates—Private. Sixty years later, the Memphis Fire Department remains integrated and three African Americans have held the highest posi-tion of Director, including Alvin Benson who now serves as the Chief of the Shelby County Fire Department. \nMr. Speaker, these twelve men are a part of \nMemphis history. They are honored with an exhibit at the Fire Museum of Memphis and they have a place in the hearts of the citizens of Memphis. Now, they will be honored and remembered in the United States C\nONGRES -\nSIONAL RECORD . I ask all of my colleagues to \njoin me in recognizing the 60th year of deseg-regation of the Memphis Fire Department. \nf \nHONORING THE FIFTH ANNIVER-\nSARY OF THE DEATH OF U.S. BORDER PATROL AGENT BRIAN TERRY \nHON. DARRELL E. ISSA \nOF CALIFORNIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor \nBrian Terry and his service to this great coun-try as a U.S. Border Patrol agent. \nIn 2009, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, \nFirearms, and Explosives began a program known as ‘‘Operation Fast and Furious.’’ The program was a maligned attempt to track 2,000 weapons destined for drug cartels. \nFive years ago, Border Patrol agents were \nassaulted by a band of robbers 17 miles in-side the U.S. border in Arizona, resulting in the death of Brian Terry on December 15, 2010. Two of the guns found at the scene were linked to Operation Fast and Furious. Together with Senator C\nHUCK GRASSLEY and \nthe Senate Judiciary Committee, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Re-form attempted to get answers for the Terry family, but this effort has been stonewalled and obstructed by those responsible for the ill- conceived Operation. \nBefore serving three and a half years with \nthe U.S. Border Patrol, Agent Terry served in the United States Marine Corps and worked as a police officer in Ecorse and Lincoln Park, Michigan, not far from his hometown of Flat \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE8.009 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1791 December 15, 2015 \nRock. He was only 40 years old when his life \nwas cut tragically short. Agent Terry is sur-vived by his mother, father, stepmother, step-father, brother and two sisters. \nSome of those involved in Agent Terry’s \nshooting were recently convicted for their ter-rible crime. However, the Obama Administra-tion continues to actively resist turning over in-formation related to the Congressional inves-tigation into Operation Fast and Furious. We must never give up our fight to ensure the Terry family gets nothing less than full ac-countability from their government. I have pledged to them before, and do so again today, that I will continue to pursue the truth. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO RYAN SCHWEIZER \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate Ryan Schweizer from Dowling Catholic High School for winning the Class 4A Boys Cross Country individual title. Ryan is the son of Mike and Kathy Schweizer. \nRyan has spent his high school career \nworking towards a single goal: winning a cov-eted state championship. After 4 long years of hard work, Ryan was able to achieve that goal when he crossed the finish line at the 2015 Class 4A Boys Cross Country State Cham-pionship. He finished 4 seconds ahead of any other runner. \nMr. Speaker, the example set by Ryan dem-\nonstrates the rewards of hard work, dedica-tion, and perseverance. I am honored to rep-resent him and his family in the United States Congress. I ask that all of my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives join me in congratulating Ryan on competing in this rigorous competition and wishing him nothing but continued success in his education and athletic pursuits. \nf \nIN RECOGNITION OF MAYOR GER-\nALD W. GROSS OF WEST EAS-TON, PENNSYLVANIA \nHON. MATT CARTWRIGHT \nOF PENNSYLVANIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to \nhonor the Mayor of the Borough of West Eas-ton, PA, the Honorable Gerald W. Gross, for his 50 years of service as an elected official. His accomplishments were recognized by the West Easton Borough Council on the evening of Monday, December 14. \nMayor Gross first held an official role in \nWest Easton as a member of the Borough Council. It was a position he held for twenty years. In 1986, he was sworn in as the Mayor of West Easton. He has been the mayor for thirty years. \nKnown to be a patient and giving man, \nMayor Gross would take calls from home to hear complaints and questions from Borough residents. He owns a landscaping business and often donates free materials and services to the Borough to maintain parks and rec-reational areas. As a dedicated leader, Mayor Gross closely \noversaw several large community projects, such as the installment of public sewer lines and the planning and construction of the West Easton municipal building. He also led plan-ning and preparations for the Borough’s cen-tennial celebration in 1998, which was ended with a fireworks display. \nMayor Gross has been ardent in his efforts \nto boost economic development in the Bor-ough. A notable accomplishment was his role in the establishment of a new Northampton County leased DUI Treatment Center in 2012, which generates $50,000 in impact fees for the Borough’s general fund. Additionally, he has worked to make the community and its parks safe and clean in order to promote West Easton as a great place for families. \nMayor Gross is also known to be someone \nwho can bring people together. He believes much can be done when people are willing to compromise, and he stresses the importance of listening to each other and staying focused on the greater good of the community. His good works have served as a role model for his daughter, Kelly Gross, who was first elect-ed to West Easton Borough Council in 1993 and currently serves as Council President. \nIt is an honor for me to recognize Mayor \nGerald Gross for his generous nature and his lifetime of service. With a will to do for others, he has improved his community and inspired the next generation of leaders. \nf \nCHINA DISCRIMINATES AGAINST \nCANADIAN FALUN GONG CON-TESTANT \nHON. TED POE \nOF TEXAS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I come \nhere today with yet another example of Chi-na’s egregious disregard for the most basic of human rights—the right to live freely. \nAfter the Falun Gong’s rise in popularity in \nthe 1990s, the Chinese Government perceived this peaceful group as a threat. Over the years, Falun Gong followers in China have been imprisoned, tortured, and killed. In fact, there are more Falun Gong practitioners in prison in China than any other persecuted group. \nLast month China hit a new low in its at-\ntempt to silence the Falun Gong community. Anastasia Lin is a Falun Gong practitioner who also happens to be Miss World Canada. The Miss World competition is held this year in China but Miss Canada can’t go. Why? Be-cause China refused to give her a visa. She was given no explanation why. However, the motive is clear. Beijing does not like how out-spoken Ms. Lin has been about China’s human rights abuses and religious oppression. \nAnastasia Lin moved from China to Canada \nwhen she was 13 years old. Yet she has not stopped fighting for the rights of her fellow members of the Falun Gong community. Dur-ing a congressional hearing in July, Ms. Lin told Members that tens of thousands of Falun Gong practitioners have been killed so their organs could be harvested and sold for trans-plants. Clearly, Beijing’s only concern is re-maining in power, not the welfare of the Chi-nese people. Last week, on the 65th annual International \nHuman Rights Day, I gave another speech de-manding Beijing put a stop to this atrocious practice of harvesting organs from prisoners of conscience. It is high time China ends its ille-gal subjugation of Falun Gong practitioners. Justice must be served. \nUnfortunately, Anastasia Lin is an innocent \nvictim of the Chinese Government’s attempts to persecute the Falun Gong. It just goes to show how obsessed the Chinese Government is about persecuting the Falun Gong. Beijing is now censoring beauty pageants. But the courageous men and women of the Falun Gong community will not be silenced by Bei-jing’s abuse—beauty pageant or no beauty pageant. \nAnd that’s just the way it is. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO RUTH LAMPE \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate Ms. Ruth Lampe, who at the age of 102 has received her honorary high school diploma from Winterset High School. \nBack in Ruth’s younger years it wasn’t un-\ncommon for students to drop out of school and go work to help support their family. She did so after her freshman year at Winterset High School. Ruth would have graduated with the class of 1931. Today, Ruth volunteers her time two days a week at the senior center in Winterset where she helps serve meals to those who need it the most. A friend of Ruth’s, and another regular at the senior center, worked with the school district for months to attain her honorary diploma. \nMr. Speaker, applaud and congratulate Ruth \nfor receiving her high school diploma after so many years and thank her for staying active in her community. I am proud to represent her in the United States Congress. I ask that my col-leagues in the United States House of Rep-resentatives join me in congratulating Ruth and wishing her nothing but the best. \nf \nVISA WAIVER PROGRAM IMPROVE-\nMENT AND TERRORIST TRAVEL PREVENTION ACT OF 2015 \nSPEECH OF \nHON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN \nOF MARYLAND \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 8, 2015 \nMr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, today while \nI rise in support of H.R. 158 the Visa Waiver Program Improvement Act of 2015, I must also note my reservations about some of the provisions in this bill. \nPresident Obama in an address to the \nAmerican people from the Oval Office specifi-cally asked Congress to pass legislation to ad-dress any weaknesses within our visa waiver program (VWP) and for a ‘‘stronger screening for travelers to the U.S. without a visa to check if they have travelled to warzones.’’ \nAfter the terror attacks in Paris, France and \nSan Bernandino, California we must ensure \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\K15DE8.011 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1792 December 15, 2015 \nthat a law created to encourage travel and cul-\ntural exchange is not exploited by those who would do us harm. We must scrutinize and strengthen our VWP and many of the provi-sions in this bill do just that. I support the pro-visions in this bill that encourage our allies to share biometric data, improve data sharing on criminal and security concerns and stronger vetting systems This bi-partisan effort is a sig-nificant improvement over H.R. 4038, a bill which did nothing but target innocent refugees and exploited xenophobic and unsubstantiated fears. \nWhile I support the overall thrust of this bill, \nI do have some reservations. I am concerned that there are not exceptions for journalists, ministers or aid workers who provide vital services to a needy population. The exclusion for law enforcement or military personnel should be extended to include people who visit Syria, Sudan, or Iraq for completely inno-cent and humanitarian reasons. We should continue to scrutinize the VWF so that we do not unnecessarily target innocent travelers. \nI hope our colleagues in the Senate take \nthese reservations into account when they consider this bill. \nf \nPERSONAL EXPLANATION \nHON. SCOTT PERRY \nOF PENNSYLVANIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, on December 2, \n2015, I inadvertently voted ‘‘aye’’ on Roll Call 657. I intended to vote ‘‘nay’’. This amend-ment was offered by Mr. T\nONKO of New York. \nf \nRECOGNIZING TIM GORDON \nHON. KEN BUCK \nOF COLORADO \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to rec-\nognize Mr. Tim Gordon for his service to our country in the United States Army. I believe that America’s brave men and women in uni-form are the nation’s greatest assets. They have made incredible sacrifices for our country and deserve our utmost support and aid for their service. \nMr. Gordon was in the Army from June \n1966 through April 1972. During this time, he fought in Vietnam from February 1969 through February 1970, no soldiers were lost under his command. Ultimately, he was honorably dis-charged with the rank of Captain. \nOur nation owes no greater debt of gratitude \nthan the one we owe our veterans. They and their families should be commended. On be-half of the 4th Congressional District of Colo-rado, I extend my best wishes to Mr. Tim Gor-don. \nMr. Speaker, it is an honor to recognize Mr. \nTim Gordon for his accomplishments. TRIBUTE TO MAJOR MICHAEL \nPOCHE \nHON. STEVE CHABOT \nOF OHIO \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay \ntribute to Major Michael Poche of the United States Army for his extraordinary dedication to duty and service to our Nation. Major Poche and his wife Stephanie will be moving on from his present assignment as an Army Congres-sional Liaison for the Office of the Secretary of Defense to serve as an officer in the Louisiana National Guard. \nArmy Congressional Liaison officers provide \nan invaluable service to both the military and Congress. They assist Members and staff in understanding the Army’s policies, actions, op-erations, and requirements. Their first-hand knowledge of military needs, culture, and tradi-tion is a tremendous benefit to Congressional offices. Prior to serving as a Congressional Li-aison, Mike served as a Military Congressional Fellow. During that year he also earned a Masters in Legislative Affairs from the George Washington University. \nA native of Monroe, Louisiana, Mike first \njoined the Louisiana National Guard in 1996 and subsequently earned his commission through the University of Louisiana at Monroe ROTC in 2004. During his 19-year Army ca-reer, Mike has served in numerous tactical leadership and staff assignments as an Armor and Cavalry Officer. As a platoon leader and troop commander, Mike commanded troops in Iraq over three separate combat tours totaling 35 months. \nHis great work has not gone unnoticed. Dur-\ning Major Poche’s distinguished service to this nation, he has earned awards and decorations including: three Bronze Star Medals, the Meri-torious Service Medal, the Army Commenda-tion Medal, and four Army Achievement Med-als. \nMr. Speaker, it is my honor to recognize the \nselfless service of Major Poche, his wife Stephanie, and their three children: Kaley, Mari Katherine, and Evan. I wish them the best as they continue to serve our great nation and proceed to the next chapter in their re-markable careers. \nf \nIN HONOR OF DAVIDSON COUNTY \nMANAGER ROBERT HYATT’S SERVICE TO THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA \nHON. RICHARD HUDSON \nOF NORTH CAROLINA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nhonor the retirement of Mr. Robert Hyatt, Da-vidson County Manager. Mr. Hyatt has been a tireless advocate for the people of Davidson County, and has fully earned the admiration and gratitude of his fellow North Carolinians. \nMr. Hyatt served as Davidson County Man-\nager for over 16 years after being appointed to the position on May 24, 1999. Prior to his ap-pointment as Davidson County Manager, Mr. Hyatt served as Assistant County Manager of Brunswick County, North Carolina, from 1995 to 1999; Town Manager for the Town of Clay-\nton, North Carolina, from 1988 to 1995; and Town Manager for the Town of Wallace, North Carolina, from 1983 to 1988. This is an im-pressive record of service for any public serv-ant, and is certainly worthy of the recognition and praise Mr. Hyatt has received during the later years of his service as Davidson County Manager. \nRecently, Mr. Hyatt was presented the \nOrder of the Long Leaf Pine, the highest award the Governor of North Carolina can be-stow, on December 8, 2015. The Order was created in 1963, and has been presented to honor persons who have a proven record of service to the State of North Carolina. In addi-tion to this prestigious honor, Mr. Hyatt re-ceived the ‘‘Service to Agriculture and Exten-sion Award’’ from the Davidson County Coop-erative Extension for his efforts in support of the local agricultural industry and for his rep-resentation in 2015 on the North Carolina State University Visioning Team. Mr. Hyatt was also recognized for his thirty years of service from the International City/County Management Association on September 25, 2013. \nIn addition to his service as Davidson Coun-\nty Manager, Mr. Hyatt has been an exemplary civil servant through his contributions to a number of other organizations. He has served on the North Carolina City/County Managers Association’s Membership Support and Pro-gram Committees, and served a three-year term as a member of the executive board for the Boy Scouts for the Uwharrie District of North Carolina. \nMr. Speaker, please join me today in thank-\ning Davidson County Manager Robert Hyatt for his esteemed service to the state of North Carolina and wishing Robert, his wife Teresa, and their two sons, Will and Thom, well as they enter an exciting new chapter of their lives. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO RODNEY AND KAREN \nWAHLE \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate Rodney and Karen Wahle of Carson, Iowa, on the very special occasion of their 50th wedding anni-versary. They were married on November 6, 1965, at the Malvern Methodist Church in Mal-vern, Iowa. \nRodney and Karen’s lifelong commitment to \neach other, their children, James and Jennifer, and their grandchildren, truly embodies our Iowa values. It is families like the Wahles that make me proud to call myself an Iowan and represent the people of our great state. \nMr. Speaker, I commend this great couple \non their 50th year together and I wish them many more. I ask that my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives join me in congratulating them on this momentous occasion. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.007 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1793 December 15, 2015 \nIN RECOGNITION OF THE 100TH AN-\nNIVERSARY OF THE HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM \nHON. DEBBIE DINGELL \nOF MICHIGAN \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nrecognize Henry Ford Health System on their 100th anniversary. Originating from Detroit General Hospital, namesake Henry Ford be-came the sole investor in 1914 and coupled \nhis entrepreneurial spirit with medical innova-tion. \nAdmitting its first patient in 1915, Henry \nFord Hospital was so successful in meeting the needs of a city in the midst of a population boom that by 1917 it had already expanded to its current size. In its early days, the hospital revolutionized wait times, reducing them to 30 minutes for a patient to be seen, and opened the nation’s first ward for treating chemical de-pendency. It developed new techniques in the fields of surgery and physical therapy. The ex-cellent quality of care at Henry Ford Hospital would even later inspire works of art from vi-sionaries like Diego Rivera. Beyond the posi-tive impact Henry Ford Hospital has had on Michigan, it has also rendered invaluable serv-ice to our country by serving as an army hos-pital during World War II and caring for our soldiers upon their return. \nHenry Ford Health System and its partners \nhave pioneered a broad range of medical knowledge, from bone research to kidney transplants to treatment of high blood pressure to robotic surgery. While innovation may be the driving force behind the success of the Henry Ford Health System, they have never lost focus of the top priority: people. In 2008, they launched the No Harm campaign which, over the course of the next three years, re-duced surgical complications, decreased length of stay, and trimmed medical costs by 10 million dollars. Their good stewardship is felt by over 89,000 patients a year in the five- county area, a number that is very impressive for a hospital system that started with 48 beds. Henry Ford Health System’s commit-ment to and investment in the Detroit metro-politan communities are immeasurable. In 2011, Henry Ford Health System was one of only 4 recipients to receive a Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, America’s highest honor for innovation and performance excel-lence. \nMr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me \ntoday in honoring the 23,000 employees of Henry Ford Health System and congratulating them on their 100th anniversary and wish them many more years of success. \nf \nREGARDING THE NATIONAL \nGUARD AND RESERVISTS DEBT RELIEF EXTENSION ACT OF 2015 \nHON. STEVE COHEN \nOF TENNESSEE \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in \nsupport of the National Guard and Reservists Debt Relief Extension Act of 2015, which I in-troduced earlier today with my colleagues J\nERROLD NADLER and D ANAROHRABACHER . This bipartisan legislation ensures that cer-\ntain members of the National Guard and Re-serves who fall on hard economic times after their service will continue to obtain bankruptcy relief without having to fill out the substantial paperwork required by the so-called ‘‘means test’’ under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. \nThis bill simply extends the existing ‘‘means \ntest’’ exception, which will expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act. \nUnder the means test, a Chapter 7 bank-\nruptcy case is presumed to be an abuse of the bankruptcy process if it appears that the debt-or has income in excess of certain thresholds. The National Guard and Reservists Debt Re-lief Act of 2008 created an exception to the means test’s presumption of abuse for mem-bers of the National Guard and Reserves who, after September 11, 2001, served on active duty or in a homeland defense activity for at least 90 days. The exception remains avail-able for 540 days after the servicemember leaves the military. \nThe National Guard and Reservist Debt Re-\nlief Extension Act of 2015 would simply extend the exception until December 2019. \nThis bill is a meaningful way for our Nation \nto recognize the tremendous sacrifice made by National Guard and Reserve members who have served on active duty or homeland de-fense since September 11, 2001 and may be suffering financial hardship. \nI urge my colleagues to support this bill. \nf \nACKNOWLEDGING TED BEATTIE \nHON. DANNY K. DAVIS \nOF ILLINOIS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speak-\ner, I rise to acknowledge a dear friend and an exceptional leader, Mr. Ted Beattie, as he re-tires as President and CEO of Chicago’s Shedd Aquarium. Ted has very many notable achievements during his tenure at Shedd, from the $45 million Wild Reef exhibit that fea-tures one of the largest and most diverse shark exhibits in North America; the renova-tion of the aquarium’s popular Abbott Ocea-narium marine mammal pavilion; and housing of eight amazing beluga whales. \nI have had been pleased that Ted opened \nthe doors of Shedd to several of Chicago’s school groups to learn more about marine based sciences and get an in depth look into the vast exhibits to encourage our children to engage in science and biology based careers. \nFurther, I have been told that Ted is an \namazing golfer and as a high school golfer, played with Renee Powell against Legendary Boxer Joe Louis and Althea Gibson. While Ted has called Chicago home for many years, he is undoubtedly an extremely passionate and dedicated Ohio State graduate and fan (a rival of our Flagship University of Illinois). \nTed is an active member of the American \nZoo and Aquarium Association (AZA), and serves on several boards including the Amer-ican Association of Museums, the Arts Club board of directors and is a member of the Chi-cago Club, the Commercial Club of Chicago, Economic Club of Chicago, the Onwentsia Country Club and the Plantation Club in Ponte Vedra Beach, FL. \nI am hopeful that Ted continues his services \nto the greater arts community and his Alma Mata, the Ohio State University. I am certain \nthat he will continue to enjoy the game of golf that he loves and will inspire those involved in marine sciences for many years to come. Transition to retirement can be fun, enjoyable and relaxing, so to Ted . . . \nMay the road rise up to meet you. May the wind be always at your back. May the sun shine warm upon your face; the rains fall soft upon your fields and until \nwe meet again, \nmay God hold you in the palm of His hand. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO CURTIS AND BRENDA \nMEIER \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise to \nhonor and congratulate Curtis and Brenda Meier of Clarinda, Iowa, for receiving the Gary Wergin Good Farm Neighbor Award. The Wergin Good Farm Neighbor award is named for Gary Wergin, a long-time WHO Radio farm broadcaster who helped establish the award. \nThe Wergin Good Farm Neighbor Award is \nmade possible by the financial support of the Coalition to Support Iowa’s Farmers. The award recognizes farmers who contribute their time and talents to their community, including caring for the environment and being good neighbors. \nCurtis and Brenda are active in their com-\nmunity and their church. Curtis is a commis-sioner with the Page County Soil and Water Conservation District and serves on the Coun-ty Fair Board. The Meiers run their local diver-sified farm with a number of their family mem-bers, including their son, daughter, and their families. \nMr. Speaker, I applaud and congratulate \nCurtis and Brenda for earning this award. They are shining examples of how hard work and dedication can be a benefit to a whole community I ask that my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives join me in congratulating Curtis and Brenda for their accomplishments and in wishing them nothing but continued success. \nf \nRESTORATION TUESDAY \nHON. TERRI A. SEWELL \nOF ALABAMA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMs. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, \ntoday I rise to acknowledge Restoration Tues-day, and the need to restore federal voter pro-tections for vulnerable communities. Every Tuesday that Congress is in session shall be known as Restoration Tuesday, and I invite each of you to share constituent testimonials about modern-day barriers to voting. \nI am a proud daughter of Selma, Alabama \nwhere 50 years ago the brave Foot Soldiers of the Voting Rights Movement dared to chal-lenge an unjust system that prohibited people of color from voting in the South. \nUnfortunately, Alabama has not yet fully \nlearned the lessons of its painful past. We \nhave witnessed a renewed assault on our sa-cred right to vote in the wake of Shelby Coun-ty versus Holder. In the aftermath of the Su-preme Court’s decision, Alabama implemented \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.013 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1794 December 15, 2015 \none of the most restrictive photo ID laws in the \nnation. Under this pernicious voter ID law, only a handful of photo IDs can be used at polling places. \nWhen the State of Alabama started requir-\ning a photo ID to vote, officials claimed it would reduce voter fraud. The reality is that voter fraud is rare—but the end results are that more than 250,000 Alabamians without a photo ID have been disenfranchised. Many of the disenfranchised are African-Americans, low-income individuals, senior citizens, and the disabled. \nThis past October, Alabama lawmakers de-\ncided to make this bad law even worse by re-ducing services at 34 DMVs across the state. Driver’s licenses are the most popular form of ID used at the polls—and 8 out of the 10 counties in Alabama that are impacted have the highest percentage of black registered vot-ers in the state. How is this not discrimina-tory? \nI fully support the federal lawsuit filed by the \nGreater Birmingham Ministries and the Ala-bama NAACP, challenging the photo ID law in our state. I have repeatedly argued that Ala-bama’s photo ID law is a renewed assault on voting rights. \nI also applaud the U.S. Department of \nTransportation’s decision to investigate the re-duction of services at the 34 DMVs in question for a possible violation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Alabama cannot balance its budget on the backs of those who can least afford it, nor infringe upon the civil rights of mi-norities by limiting access to the most popular form of identification used to vote. \nVoting is at the heart of our democracy. It’s \nour most fundamental right—and duty—as Americans. I am a proud Alabamian, so it dis-appointments me that for every two steps Ala-bama takes forward, we take one step back. \nVoting should be made easier—not hard-\ner—so that no voices are excluded and that every citizen can cast their vote without any unnecessary or unwarranted barriers. \nAlabama recently reached a settlement with \nthe Department of Justice to settle claims that the state did not fully comply with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. An investiga-tion by the Department of Justice found that Alabama had largely failed to provide opportu-nities for Alabamians to register to vote when they applied for or renewed a driver’s license. \nMr. Speaker, we have witnessed a number \nof attempts—not just in Alabama—but across the country to restrict the vote. I stand before you today to urge Congress to restore the vote. Representatives L\nINDA SA´NCHEZ , JUDY \nCHUand I introduced the Voting Rights Ad-\nvancement Act in June to stop the renewed assault on voting rights, and to restore preclearance for states like Alabama where new barriers to voting threaten to silence the most vulnerable voices in our electorate. \nWe cannot take for granted the battles en-\ndured by those who came before us, nor can we neglect our own responsibilities to ensure liberty and justice. The struggle continues, and each of us must do our part to further the cause of human and civil rights for all Ameri-cans. \nWe must restore the voices of the ex-\ncluded—Congress must act today to restore the vote. IMPACT OF THE ARTS ON STU-\nDENTS AT SAVOY ELEMENTARY \nHON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON \nOF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMs. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to call at-\ntention to the remarkable impact of art on the educational performance of the students at Savoy Elementary, a public school in my dis-trict. \nSavoy Elementary Anacostia, located here \nin the nation’s capital, is one of eight pilot schools of Turnaround Arts, a signature pro-gram of the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities. Turnaround Arts has had clear, life-changing impacts on the students of Savoy—attendance is up, discipline referrals are down, and the school has made double- digit gains in math and reading scores. \nThe Savoy Players are a performing group \nat Savoy Elementary. Led by Carol Foster, a legendary arts leader in the national capital re-gion, this group has been hugely successful. To be part of this group, students must exhibit maturity, grit, excellent attendance, and good grades. The professionalism, spirit, and mag-netism of this group has catapulted them into the limelight. \nIn addition to countless performances for \ntheir school community, they have had four performances at the White House, performed with Brian McKnight at the Warner Theater, and brought down the house at the Kennedy Center. But, most importantly, singing, dancing and performing has brought them the joy, meaning, and purpose that every child should experience. \nMr. Speaker, in this holiday season, I ask \nmy colleagues to join me in celebrating the clear benefit exposure to the arts has made for the children of Savoy Elementary, and hope that the new education legislation will bring similar opportunities to kids across the country. \nf \nINTRODUCTION OF THE AVONTE’S \nLAW ACT OF 2015 \nHON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS \nOF FLORIDA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nintroduce a bill, the Avonte’s Law Act of 2015, which was inspired by the tragic cir-cumstances surrounding the death of Avonte Oquendo of Queens, New York. Avonte was an autistic child who wandered away from his school. His lifeless body was not found for more than a month. ‘‘Wandering’’ is very com-mon in children with autism and other disabil-ities, and sometimes children who wander are non-verbal or cannot communicate well with others, leading to dangerous interactions with strangers or even law enforcement. \nThis bill authorizes a new grant program \nwithin the United States Department of Justice to provide local law enforcement agencies with the resources to procure response tools and increase education and training for first re-sponders, schools, and families with the goal of preventing situations like Avonte’s from happening again. The bill also requires the Attorney General \nto establish standards and best practices for the administration of any type of voluntary ‘‘tracking’’ system used by law enforcement agencies that are awarded these funds. Track-ing devices are one of the many ways we can help prevent another tragic situation like Avonte’s. \nMr. Speaker, by taking a holistic approach \nto this issue, we can help children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) live safe and happy lives all around the country. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO THE NODAWAY VAL-\nLEY BOYS CROSS COUNTRY TEAM \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate the Nodaway Valley High School Boys Cross Country team for winning the Iowa Class 1A State Cross Country Championship. \nI would like to congratulate each member of \nthe team: \nRunners: Nathan Venteicher, Shane \nBreheny, Heath Downing, Brayten Funke, Dal-las Kraeger, Skyler Rawlings, and Brycen Wallace; \nHead Coach: Darrell Burmeister; and Assist-\nant Coaches: Dave Swanson, Phyllis Eshelman, and Alyse Dreher. \nMr. Speaker, the success of this team and \ntheir coaches demonstrates the rewards of hard work, dedication, and perseverance. I am honored to represent them in the United States Congress. I ask that all of my col-leagues in the United States House of Rep-resentatives join me in congratulating the team for competing in this rigorous competition and wishing them all nothing but continued suc-cess. \nf \nLEGISLATION ALLOWING COMBAT \nVETERANS AN EXTENDED TIME TO FILE FOR REFUND \nHON. EARL BLUMENAUER \nOF OREGON \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today I \nam introducing legislation that will allow mem-bers of our military services to file their taxes long after they were due in order to provide an adequate window to claim refunds or credits that may have been owed. \nIt has come to my attention that some mem-\nbers of our armed forces, in their haste to re-join civilian life, can occasionally let fall by the wayside tax returns—particularly those that may actually have a refund. While tax liability can follow a taxpayer forever—plus interest and penalties—taxpayers only have a couple years in which to claim a credit or a refund. \nThis legislation widens the opportunity for a \nveteran to look back, realize a missed oppor-tunity, and remedy the situation. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this solution. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.017 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1795 December 15, 2015 \nTRIBUTE TO TIM SESSOMS \nHON. MARK WALKER \nOF NORTH CAROLINA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, the Honorable \nTim Sessoms has served his community for more than thirty years. \nHis life is an example of a rare instinctive \ntrait that actually puts others first. I have per-sonally witnessed the vast amount of people who regularly reach out to Mr. Sessoms for guidance or help. \nFrom the senior adult in the elderly care \ncenter to the child in need, Tim Sessoms finds a way to solve the problem or meet the need. \nHis work as Mayor of Summerfield was an-\nother way that Mr. Sessoms chose to give back to his town. His vision and his ability to execute has moved Summerfield to a better place for years to come. \nOur community owes the Honorable \nSessoms a debt of gratitude. His friends and neighbors know that he walks the walk with in-tegrity and grace. We all owe him a ‘‘thank you’’ for a lifetime of putting his fellow man first. \nf \nAIKEN NAMED MAIN STREET \nCOMMUNITY \nHON. JOE WILSON \nOF SOUTH CAROLINA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speak-\ner, last week, Aiken was named a Main Street Community—one of only two communities to receive this honor from Main Street South Carolina. The Main Street Community des-ignation provides Aiken with a comprehensive training and assistance to revitalize their downtown through a three year boot-camp program. Aiken joins Orangeburg as the sec-ond community in South Carolina’s Second Congressional District to receive the Main Street Community designation. \nAfter a competitive application process, the \ncity of Aiken was recognized for their work in promoting historic and economic development downtown. In the next few years, they will work with Main Street South Carolina to iden-tify the goals of its community and to provide residents, business owners, and local leaders with key resources to enhance the local eco-nomic development. \nI am grateful to Mayor Rick Osbon, former \nMayor Fred Cavanaugh, City Manager John Klimm, and the entire Aiken City Council for receiving this great honor. I look forward to seeing the positive impact this will bring to Aiken. \nIn conclusion, God Bless Our Troops and \nmay the President by his actions never forget September 11th in the Global War on Ter-rorism. HONORING REVEREND SAMUEL \nLITTLEJOHN \nHON. MARC A. VEASEY \nOF TEXAS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. VEASEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nhonor Reverend Samuel Littlejohn’s 50th anni-versary as a spiritual leader and Pastor of Shining Light Missionary Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas. \nReverend Littlejohn was born in Tyler, \nTexas, to a Baptist minister and a family dedi-cated to the church. As a young child, his mother, father, and grandfather all instilled an abiding love for and sustaining commitment to his religion. He was baptized at the age of seven at the Greater Hopwell Missionary Bap-tist Church in Tyler, where he remained a member until he moved to Fort Worth to pur-sue seminary studies. \nIn 1951, Reverend Littlejohn moved to Fort \nWorth and joined Pilgrim Valley Missionary Baptist Church. He served as the Super-intendent of the Sunday school, participated in the Senior Choir, and acted as the President of the #2 Usher Department. \nReverend Littlejohn continued his seminary \neducation by earning a missionary degree from Southwest Theological Seminary and Bishop College. In November 1960, Reverend Littlejohn was ordained and gave his first ser-mon in front of Pilgrim Valley church. \nHe served the Pilgrim Valley community \nuntil 1965, when he was called to pastor Shin-ing Light Missionary Baptist Church, where he has served for the last 50 years. \nAlong with his work in his church commu-\nnities, Reverend Littlejohn has continued to be an active and vocal participant in the commu-nity. Pastor Littlejohn has worked with the Community Action Agency (CAA), was an or-ganizing member of the first Ministers and Po-lice Taskforce and served as a member of Parent, Preacher, and Principal organization which worked with Fort Worth Independent School District to encourage children to stay in school. \nMost notably, Pastor Littlejohn was the driv-\ning force behind the Stop Six Community Health Center. Reverend Littlejohn was a founding member of the Stop Six Community Corporation and much of the success of the organization can be attributed to the Rev-erend. His work greatly impacted the DFW community and is now used as a model in other cities. \nEarlier this year, the Black Pastors, Clergy \nand Ministerial Group Association of Texas, Inc. presented Pastor Littlejohn with the ‘‘Liv-ing Legend Award’’ and recognized him as one of the honorable senior pastors in Fort Worth. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO LEONARD AND \nMARYANN BRYAN \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate Leonard and Maryann Bryan of Council Bluffs, Iowa, on the very special occasion of their 50th wed-\nding anniversary. They were married in 1965. \nLeonard and Maryann’s lifelong commitment \nto each other and their children, Steven, Traci, and Cari, their grandchildren, and great-grand-children, truly embodies our Iowa values. It is families like the Bryans that make me proud to call myself an Iowan and represent the people of our great state. \nMr. Speaker, I commend this great couple \non their 50th year together and I wish them many more. I ask that my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives join me in congratulating them on this momentous occasion. \nf \nHONORING THE GRAND OPENING \nOF SOUTHLAKE’S SENIOR ACTIV-ITY CENTER \nHON. KENNY MARCHANT \nOF TEXAS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. MARCHANT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today \nto recognize and congratulate the City of Southlake’s grand opening of the Southlake Senior Activity Center. \nThe history of the Southlake senior center \nbegan in 1998, when Mayor Gail Eubanks, Southlake’s first mayor, donated the original facility to the city to serve as the activity and social center for the growing senior community in Southlake. Since the opening of the original senior center, the population of Southlake has nearly doubled in size. To accommodate the needs of this growing community, plans were developed and approved for the construction of a new community recreation center. On September 27, 2014, the City of Southlake broke ground for the construction of the new, state of the art, recreation and senior center known as The Marq. \nThe Marq contains over 20,000 square feet \nof multipurpose space which includes a senior lounge, senior wellness room, game room, banquet hall, and amphitheater. In it, the new Southlake Senior Activity Center will serve the community by providing programs and serv-ices to Southlake area seniors, enhancing their lives and fostering a sense of community among the city’s residents. \nI am extremely appreciative of the City of \nSouthlake and the Southlake Senior Activity Center for continuing to address the needs of the community by enhancing the quality of their infrastructure and the lives of its seniors. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 24th Congres-sional District of Texas, I ask all my distin-guished colleagues to join me in congratu-\nlating the City of Southlake and the Southlake Senior Activity Center on the grand opening of their new facility. \nf \nACKNOWLEDGING THE ASSOCIA-\nTION FOR TALENT DEVELOP-MENT \nHON. DONALD S. BEYER, JR. \nOF VIRGINIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ac-\nknowledge the Association for Talent Develop-ment (ATD) as the largest association dedi-cated to the training and talent development \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.022 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1796 December 15, 2015 \nprofession, recognizing them for their annual \nEmployee Learning Week, held December 7th through the 11th, 2015. \nATD’s members come from more than 120 \ncountries and work in public and private orga-nizations in every industry sector. ATD sup-ports talent development professionals who gather locally in volunteer-led U.S. chapters and international member networks, and with international strategic partners. \nEstablished in 1943, ATD is a leader in the \ntalent development field. As businesses seek competitive advantages and growth, talent de-velopment professionals make sure an organi-zation’s best asset, its employees, have the skills they need to help achieve business growth. ATD serves this important community of professionals with research and resources. \nTo further these goals, ATD has declared \nDecember 7th through December 11th, 2015, as ‘‘Employee Learning Week’’ and des-ignated time for organizations to recognize the strategic value of employee learning. I applaud ATD and its members for their dedication to developing knowledgeable and skilled employ-ees during Employee Learning Week. \nI urge my colleagues to join me in sup-\nporting policies that commit to maintaining a highly skilled workforce. \nf \nHONORING PATRICK M CCORMICK \nOF PENNSYLVANIA \nHON. SCOTT PERRY \nOF PENNSYLVANIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, today I’d like to \nhonor Patrick McCormick on his retirement after more than 38 years of service to the United States of America. \nWhether through his service through the \nU.S. Air Force, New Cumberland Army Depot, or his leadership roles as Director of Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Distribution’s Current Operations and Logistics Operations, his tire-less dedication, professionalism and sacrifice touched the lives of countless people and challenged all with whom he worked with to be the best. \nThrough numerous promotions and awards \nPatrick has left an enduring legacy of service. In particular, by earning the Department of De-fense (DOD) Distinguished Civilian Service award, the highest award available for career DOD civilian employees, he demonstrated an exceptional devotion to duty. Through hard work and leadership Patrick’s record of service to our Nation’s warfighters and citizens is truly outstanding. \nIt is with great pride along with Pennsylva-\nnia’s Fourth Congressional district that I con-gratulate Patrick McCormick on his retirement after more than 38 years of service to the United States of America. \nf \nRECOGNIZING THE 50TH ANNIVER-\nSARY OF CALIFORNIA CITY \nHON. KEVIN McCARTHY \nOF CALIFORNIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. M CCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today \nin recognition of the 50th anniversary of the in-corporation of California City, a residential \nnexus for mining, aerospace and desert tour-ism in Eastern Kern County. \nCalifornia City began with a dream worthy of \nits namesake: the foundation of a suburban metropolis to rival Los Angeles. Sociologist and developer Nat Mendelsohn found in the wide spaces of Kern’s High Desert the chance to build a completely planned community from scratch, free of parochial interests. He bought 80,000 acres of desert in 1958, carved out a gigantic Central Park featuring a 20 acre lake, and by 1965 had arranged for the incorpora-tion of a massive, 203 square mile township. Overnight, California City became the third largest city in the state. \nFor generations before Nat Mendelsohn \never gazed upon the High Desert, mule teams carted the bounty of stranded mines to the railheads at Mojave. This traffic expanded in the 20th century, as neighboring Boron grew to produce half the world’s supply of borax. Meanwhile, huddled around ancient dry lakes just a dozen miles from town, America’s pre-mier jet aircraft test center—Edwards Air Force Base—began to expand into a perma-nent institution, with hundreds of employees needing homes and services. Even tourism brought jobs to California City, as the surging popularity of dirt bikes and off-roading drew thrill-seekers through town on their way to the wonders of the interior: Jawbone, Death Val-ley, Red Rock Canyon, and the Trona Pin-nacles. California City grew by leaps and bounds, fed by the steady currents of desert commerce. \nToday, as the city celebrates its Jubilee, we \nhave a chance to draw lessons from its his-tory. California City would never have existed without the vision and drive of one entre-preneur, willing to bet everything on a dream. In Kern County—as in America—we are de-pendent both on the enterprising spirit of our people, and on the power of our communities to persevere when they are united. I am proud today to congratulate the people of California City on this 50th anniversary, and look forward to California City’s next 50 years. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO GEORGE AND \nCATHERINE ROSS \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate George and Catherine Ross of Essex, Iowa, on the very special occasion of their 65th wedding anniversary. They were married in 1950. \nGeorge and Catherine’s lifelong commitment \nto each other and their family truly embodies our Iowa values. It is families like the Ross family that make me proud to call myself an Iowan and represent the people of our great state. \nMr. Speaker, I commend this great couple \non their 65th year together and I wish them many more. I ask that my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives join me in congratulating them on this momentous occasion. PERSONAL EXPLANATION \nHON. FRANK C. GUINTA \nOF NEW HAMPSHIRE \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. GUINTA. Mr. Speaker, on Roll Call Vote \nNumber 692, I am not recorded because I was absent from the U.S. House of Representa-tives. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner. \nOn Roll Call Number 692, had I been \npresent, I would have voted NO. \nf \nIN RECOGNITION OF LARRY \nHOLMES ON THE OCCASION OF THE UNVEILING OF THE LARRY HOLMES STATUE IN EASTON, PENNSYLVANIA \nHON. MATT CARTWRIGHT \nOF PENNSYLVANIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to \nhonor Larry Holmes, who reigned as World Boxing Council Heavyweight Champion from 1978 to 1983, and who will be honored with the installment of a bronze statue depicting the Champ about to strike a punch. His ac-complishments not only made the City of Eas-ton known nationally, they also inspired others to strive to be their best, to be a champ. \nThe statue unveiling held on Sunday, De-\ncember 13 commenced with a Championship Parade that began on 3rd Street in front of the new Easton City Hall and continued onto the Drive named in the Champ’s honor and down to the statue’s location in Scott Park on the confluence of the Delaware and Lehigh Riv-ers. \n‘‘The Easton Assassin’’ grew up in the \nprojects. At the age of 13, he dropped out of school to support his family. At the age of 19, he started boxing and pursued a legendary career. His left jab is rated among the best in boxing history. An impressive 44 of his 69 wins were from knockouts. Holmes was in-ducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 2008. \nLarry Holmes is not just a champ for his \nboxing; he is a champ for his service to the community. After retiring from boxing, Holmes became a businessman and invested in his hometown. He is noted to have employed more than 200 people through his various business holdings at one time including Larry Holmes Enterprises, a real estate and property management company; two restaurants; a training facility; and an office complex. Over the years, he has been a role model for young fighters, and he has supported various char-ities and youth groups throughout the Lehigh Valley, in particular the Easton Area Commu-nity Center (EACC), which used to be known as St. Anthony’s Youth Center—the place where he first learned to box. Later, and thanks to Holmes, the EACC’s annual fund-raiser became well-known as an event at-tended by boxing champions. Holmes can often be seen at community events and per-forming with his band. \nIt is an honor for me to recognize Larry \nHolmes. He has been a good son to Easton. Through this statue, visitors for generations will see the heart of a legend. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.027 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1797 December 15, 2015 \nHONORING SONYA GISH OF \nPENNSYLVANIA \nHON. SCOTT PERRY \nOF PENNSYLVANIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, today I’d like to \nhonor Sonya Gish on her retirement after more than 30 years of service to the United States of America. \nThrough her work with the Information Tech-\nnology Department at New Cumberland Army Depot, and her leadership role as Deputy Di-rector, and later Director, of Distribution Policy and Processing at Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Distribution, her tireless dedication, pro-fessionalism and sacrifice touched the lives of countless people and challenged all with whom she worked with to be the best. \nHer colleagues describe Sonya as the con-\nsummate role model and a truly indispensable asset to DLA Distribution. Her numerous pro-motions and awards exemplify an outstanding record of service to our Nation’s warfighters and citizens. Through work ethic and char-acter, Sonya has truly left an enduring legacy of service. \nIt is with great pride along with Pennsylva-\nnia’s Fourth Congressional district that I con-gratulate Sonya Gish on her retirement after more than 30 years of service to the United States of America. \nf \nCOLONEL MICHAEL P. DIETZ \nHON. ROGER WILLIAMS \nOF TEXAS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to \nacknowledge the distinguished career and military service of Colonel Michael P. Dietz. An Alaskan native, Michael enlisted in the United States Army in Providence, Rhode Is-land in 1979. As an Enlisted Soldier, Michael served in Europe, Korea and Central America eventually achieving the rank of Staff Ser-geant. In 1989, he was given a direct commis-sion as a 2nd Lieutenant in the U.S. Army Military Intelligence Corp. During the First Gulf War, he served with the Third Mobile Armored Corp as a Senior Intelligence Analyst. \nThroughout the 1990s Colonel (COL) Dietz \nserved in a series of positions of increasing responsibility in the area of military intelligence to include, operations officer of an Anti-Ter-rorist Response Team and culminating with the Deputy Command of the 6th Civil Support Team, an Anti-Terrorist Team specializing in Weapons of Mass Destruction. During this time, COL Dietz had operational control of re-sponse elements to the events of 9/11 and the Columbia Space Shuttle Disaster over East Texas. \nIn 2003, COL Dietz commanded mobile col-\nlection teams for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in Iraq. He later commanded the entire DIA effort in Afghanistan in 2004. Both positions required work with Allied Nations. \nIn 2008–2009, COL Dietz commanded the \n636th Military Intelligence Battalion of the Texas National Guard. This is the number one rated MI Battalion in both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. COL Dietz, in his 36 years of service, has \nserved combat tours with 101st Airborne Divi-sion, 82nd Airborne Division as a Battalion Commander, 3rd Army, 3rd Special Forces Group, United States Army Special Operations Command, 5th Special Forces Group, the De-fense Intelligence Agency and the 636th MI Battalion. \nCOL Dietz is currently a member of the \nWarrior Transition Unit at Ft. Sam Houston, Texas. This unit specializes in repairing wounded warriors. COL Dietz is in the process of being treated for numerous injuries that he sustained while deployed in Iraq and Afghani-stan. \nHe has been married for 31 years to Elly \nDel Prado Dietz and his daughter, Sharon is a 1st Lieutenant currently serving at Camp Mabry, Austin, Texas and his son, Aidan is a 2nd Lieutenant serving as an Airborne Infantry Platoon Leader in the 143rd INF BN (ABN). \nCOL Dietz’s 36 years of distinguished serv-\nice reflects great credit upon himself, the Texas Army National Guard, the United States Army and the United States of America. On behalf of a grateful Nation, I wish him and his family the very best in retirement. \nf \nTRIBUTE TO THE DOWLING \nCATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL BOYS CROSS COUNTRY TEAM \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate the Dowling Catholic High School Boys Cross Country team for winning the Iowa Class 4A State Cross Country Championship. \nI would like to congratulate each member of \nthe Team: Runners: Matthew Carmody, John Clingan, Jack Fink, Matt Fraizer, Skyler Riesberg, Jack Turner, and Ryan Schweizer; Head Coach: Timothy Ives; and Assistant Coaches: Duncan McLean, Gerard Amadeo, Ann Flood, and Kevin Lewis. \nMr. Speaker, the success of this team and \ntheir coaches demonstrates the rewards of hard work, dedication, and perseverance. I am honored to represent them in the United States Congress. I ask that all of my col-leagues in the United States House of Rep-resentatives join me in congratulating the team for competing in this rigorous competition and wishing them all nothing but continued suc-cess. \nf \nHONORING THE 240TH ANNIVER-\nSARY OF THE NAVY CHAPLAIN CORPS \nHON. J. RANDY FORBES \nOF VIRGINIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. FORBES. Mr. Speaker, today I would \nlike to recognize the 240th anniversary of the Navy Chaplain Corps. For 240 years, Navy chaplains have served with honor, courage, and selflessness, ensuring that our Sailors, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen are able to practice and grow in their faith, regardless of where they serve. Our Navy chaplains are an invaluable pillar \nof their military communities. The role of a chaplain is inherently religious. As the makeup of our service members has expanded, the chaplaincy has expanded with it to include representatives reflecting the many faith tradi-tions of our troops, including Catholic, Protes-tant, Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist. When reli-gious leaders become military chaplains, they pledge to equally serve all members of the armed forces, regardless of religious belief. Chaplains faithfully carry out this sacred duty each and every day. \nWhile military chaplains are noncombatants \nand do not carry weapons, they still serve in harm’s way. Sixteen Navy chaplains have given their lives providing religious and spir-itual support for our men and women at war. Two Navy chaplains were awarded the Con-gressional Medal of Honor for their sacrificial ministry to their Sailors and Marines. Lieuten-ant Commander Joseph T. O’Callahan braved a fiery inferno to administer last rites and di-rect damage control operations aboard the stricken USS Franklin in 1945. Lieutenant Vin-\ncent R. Capodanno repeatedly exposed him-self to intense enemy fire in Vietnam while ad-ministering last rites to dead and dying Ma-rines, refusing treatment of his own wounds and directing corpsmen to his wounded com-rades, before being killed while coming to the aide of another. Six naval ships have been named after chaplains with one, the destroyer USS Laboon , still in service. \nMr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join \nwith me today in recognizing the brave and honorable service of Navy chaplains over the last 240 years. \nf \nCOMMENDING AND CONGRATU-\nLATING JOYCE I. MARTRATT ON 50 YEARS OF CIVILIAN SERVICE WITH THE U.S. AIR FORCE \nHON. MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO \nOF GUAM \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMs. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today \nto commend and congratulate Mrs. Joyce I. Martratt on her 50 years of civilian service with the United States Air Force. Joyce has served in numerous capacities with the Air Force on Guam, and she has dedicated much of her professional life to furthering its mission and providing critical support to our Airmen. \nJoyce was born to Jesus San Nicolas and \nRosario Castro Camacho of Hagatna on Au-gust 28, 1939. She is the eldest of five chil-dren and endured the atrocities of war during the occupation of Guam during World War II. As a survivor of the war, she and her family relocated to the village of Mongmong, where they settled and began to rebuild their lives and homes. In 1955, Joyce was adopted by her Aunt Maria and Uncle Peling Castro in order for her to further her education as they moved to Washington, D.C. before resettling in San Francisco in 1956. She attended Oak-land Community College while working for the Gallop Poll. She then moved back to Guam to attend the University of Guam. While at the University of Guam, she met her late-husband Herbert Sablan Leddy, and together they start-ed a family. In 1984, Herbert passed away and Joyce later remarried Charlie Martratt. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.033 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1798 December 15, 2015 \nJoyce began working at the Andersen Air \nForce Base in 1965. She was first hired for a temporary job at the Civilian Personnel Office as a clerk typist. She went on to work as a secretary and clerk-stenographer and contin-ued to progress professionally. She served in several capacities, including work for the com-mander of the 43d Combat Support Group, Vice Commander of HQ Eighth Air Force, command of the 3rd Air Division, and the 43rd Bombardment Wing (Hvy) (SAC), the 633d Air Base Wing (PACAF), and the 13th Air Force (PACAF). Joyce worked with the 13th Air Force until the headquarters moved to Hickam in 2005. After the move, Joyce transferred to the 36th Air Base Wing Commander, where she is currently employed. \nDuring her 50 years of service, Joyce was \nprivileged to be involved in many historic events and assisted and coordinated the visits of distinguished guests to the island. She sup-ported efforts after the fall of Saigon during the Vietnam War when the people of Guam and the U.S. Air Force provided humanitarian aid to over 111,000 Vietnamese refugees who were temporarily housed on Guam during Op-eration New Life. She has also supported nu-merous U.S. Air Force missions, including the evacuation of former Philippine President Fer-dinand Marcos and his family from the Phil-ippines in 1986, and care for 6,600 Kurdish refugees who were brought to Guam as part of Joint Task Force Operation Pacific Haven in 1996. For several years, Joyce wrote a col-umn about the local culture for the AAFB newspaper called ‘‘Ask Joyce.’’ \nJoyce has been a hallmark of Andersen Air \nForce Base and our community in Guam. She has always been a dedicated worker who puts her whole heart into what she does. Joyce is a true professional and her knowledge and background has helped the constant rotation of Commanders better understand the chal-lenges and opportunities at Andersen Air Force Base. Her institutional knowledge is so critical to the entire team at Andersen Air Force Base. Additionally, Joyce is heavily in-volved in her parish of San Isidro as the direc-tor of faith formation and as a catechist. She serves in the community whenever called upon and is dedicated to her family. \nI join the United States Air Force and the \npeople of Guam in thanking Joyce I. Martratt for her 50 years of service to our nation, our island, and our Airmen in the U.S. Air Force. She represents the very best of our civilian workforce and is symbolic of the great patriot-ism that exists on Guam. I commend her for her outstanding career and tireless work in all that she has accomplished. Thank you (Si Yu’os Ma’ase), Joyce. \nf \nRECOGNIZING THE HONORABLE \nJOSEPH TYSON ON THE OCCA-SION OF HIS RETIREMENT AS A MEMBER OF THE KINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA CITY COUNCIL \nHON. G. K. BUTTERFIELD \nOF NORTH CAROLINA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to \nrecognize Kinston, North Carolina City Coun-cilman and Mayor Pro Tem, The Honorable Joseph Tyson who is retiring from public serv-ice after 17 years. The City of Kinston, located \nin my congressional district, has been fortu-nate to have a remarkable leader in Mr. Jo-seph Tyson. Through his words and actions as a City Councilman and Mayor Pro Tem, he has demonstrated time and time again that he is one of our state’s finest and most effective leaders. \nMr. Tyson spent his formative years in my \ndistrict in Beaufort, North Carolina until 1964 when he left to attend North Carolina A&T University in Winston-Salem. It was there that he received his commission as a Second Lieu-tenant in the United States Army. He would spend more than two decades in uniform as an infantry and chemical officer. He retired as a Lieutenant Colonel. \nWhen Hurricane Floyd devastated much of \neastern North Carolina in 1999, Mr. Tyson played a pivotal role in guiding the city through myriad issues resulting from the effects of the historic storm. From having to replace a wastewater treatment plant, to navigating the relocation of a large number of the city’s resi-dents, Mr. Tyson worked with other leaders to resolve problems for the benefit of the com-munity. \nMr. Tyson has always looked for ways to \ngive back, even after dedicating so much of himself to his city and his country. Following his retirement from the Army in 1993, Mr. Tyson began working as the senior Army in-structor for the JROTC program at Kingston High School. He taught cadets important lead-ership skills and equipped them with the tools they needed to succeed. He motivated and encouraged those under his command to be the best version of themselves. \nMr. Tyson has been a strong and steady \nleader for his community and has succeeded in making Kinston a better place for current and future generations. He has earned the re-spect and trust of his fellow councilmen, and has the admiration of a grateful community, whom he has diligently served. \nMr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize this \nman of conviction, principle, and exceptional character as he retires after nearly two dec-ades on the Kinston City Council. I ask my colleagues to join me in wishing The Honor-able Joseph Tyson the best of luck as he em-barks on the next chapter of his life. \nf \nHUNGARY AND THE REFUGEE \nCRISIS \nHON. TED POE \nOF TEXAS \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, before the \nParis attacks, pundits sitting in far-flung cap-itals of the world were throwing lobs at Hun-gary for turning a blind eye to the plight of Syrian refugees. Now that we know that one of the attackers posed as a refugee to get into Europe and then stayed in a refugee camp as he made his way from Greece to Paris, I’d like to do something I know the pundits won’t do: go back to an old story to make sure they got it right. \nFirst, the outside world’s opinions of what \nHungary should or should not do are wholly ir-relevant. Hungary is a sovereign country that ultimately will make its own political decisions based on its interests and concerns on a case-by-case basis. Whether Hungary lets in \nrefugees from a conflict that it had absolutely nothing to do with is a purely Hungarian ques-tion. Just like we wouldn’t want Canada telling us what to do, nor does Hungary want coun-tries like Germany telling it what to do. \nThe fact of the matter is that the refugee \nissue is complex. There are two sides to the morality argument. Yes, there is a moral argu-ment to helping those fleeing war, but let’s not forget about the moral argument for a govern-ment keeping its promise to its citizens that it will protect them. Refugees pose serious eco-nomic and security concerns to the countries of Europe. Modest estimates suggest that Germany, who has touted a welcoming pos-ture towards the refugees, will find itself spending as much as 10 billion euros in 2015 to accommodate these newcomers. If Hungary were to spend even half of that amount, it would cost the country upwards of 7% of its annual budget. \nWhile Germany may be financially capable \nof weathering the financial storm precipitated by the influx of refugees, Hungary’s economy may not. Despite notable improvements in re-cent years in both trade and investment, Hun-\ngary’s unemployment rate sits now at 10.5%. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development notes that, although Hun-gary successfully exited from recession in early 2013, the recovery of its economy is modest at best. The OECD notes Hungary must ‘‘maintain fiscal discipline,’’ underscoring Budapest’s need to invest in its own people and economy—not spend billions accommo-dating others. \nPutting the economic factors aside, it is \nquite obvious that taking in Syrian refugees comes with a whole host of security concerns. ISIS has openly boasted in recent months that it is sending operatives to Europe under the guise of refugees, intending to fulfill the ter-rorist organization’s threat to stage attacks in the West. European and American intelligence officials report that ISIS has set up a wing that specializes in launching terrorist attacks abroad, providing guidance, training and fund-ing for attacks that kill the most civilians pos-sible. Earlier this month British media outlets reported that the Tunisian leader of an al- Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group was smuggled into Europe posing as a refugee in October before being arrested and deported to Tunisia. Unfortunately, we have seen the bloody after-math of the attacks on Paris, which were car-ried out in part by an ISIS terrorist who en-tered Europe as an asylum seeker. \nThe Hungarian Government does not think \nall of the refugees are terrorists. But the grave security concerns should not be written off for the sake of humanitarianism. Hungary has a humanitarian obligation to its own people too. Hungary has called on the European Union to set up the necessary institutions and orderly processes to handle this massive influx of people into the bloc. Hungary and its neigh-boring eastern and central European countries should not be expected to bear the burden of this sea of refugees. More than anything, these countries should not be judged for mak-ing decisions based on their own interests. That is simply their right. \nAnd that’s just the way it is. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.037 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1799 December 15, 2015 \nTRIBUTE TO THE URBANDALE \nHIGH SCHOOL GIRLS CROSS COUNTRY TEAM \nHON. DAVID YOUNG \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise \ntoday to recognize and congratulate the Urbandale High School Girls Cross Country team for winning the Iowa Class 4A State Cross Country Championship. \nI would like to congratulate each member of \nthe team: \nRunners: Mickey Cole, Carly Klavins, \nNeanagit Malow, Casey Middleswart, Julia Noah, Avery Peterson, and Elyse Prescott; \nHead Coach: Dan Davis Assistant Coach: Carla Madson. Mr. Speaker, the success of this team and \ntheir coaches demonstrates the rewards of hard work, dedication, and perseverance. I am honored to represent them in the United States Congress. I ask that all of my col-leagues in the United States House of Rep-resentatives join me in congratulating the team for competing in this rigorous competition and wishing them all nothing but continued suc-cess. \nf \nPERSONAL EXPLANATION \nHON. PETE AGUILAR \nOF CALIFORNIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. AGUILAR. Mr. Speaker, on December \n2, 2015 I was absent from the House of Rep-resentatives due to a mass shooting terrorist attack in my district. I was also absent on De-cember 3rd and 8th through 11th. Due to my absence, I am not recorded on roll call votes 656 through 693. I would like to reflect how I would have voted had I been present for legis-lative business. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 656, on Agreeing to the Upton of Michigan Amendment No. 1 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 657, on Agreeing to the Tonko of New York Amendment No. 2 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 658, on Agreeing to the Gene Green of Texas Amendment No. 14 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 659, on Agreeing to the Beyer of Vir-ginia Amendment No. 17 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 660, on Agreeing to the Schakowsky of Illinois Amendment No. 19 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 661, on Agreeing to the Tonko of New York Amendment No. 22 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 662, on Agreeing to the Castor of Florida Amendment No. 23 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 663, on Agreeing to the Polis of Colo-rado Amendment No. 24 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 664, on Agreeing to the Barton of Texas Amendment No. 25 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 665, on Agreeing to the Conference Report for S. 1177, to reauthorize the Elemen-\ntary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to ensure that every child achieves. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 666, on Ordering the Previous Ques-tion for H. Res. 546, Providing for consider-ation of the conference report to accompany H.R. 22, to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and tran-sit programs, and for other purposes. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 667, on Agreeing to H. Res. 546, Pro-viding for consideration of the conference re-port to accompany H.R. 22, to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety pro-grams, and transit programs, and for other purposes. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 668, on Agreeing to the Cramer of North Dakota Amendment No. 26 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 669, on Agreeing to the Rouzer of North Carolina Amendment No. 30 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 670, on Agreeing to the Pallone of New Jersey Amendment No. 37 to H.R. 8. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 671, on the Motion to Recommit with Instructions for H.R. 8, the North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 672, on Passage of H.R. 8, the North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 673, on Agreeing to the Conference Report for H.R. 22, To authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety pro-grams, and transit programs, and for other purposes. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 674, on the Motion to Adjourn. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 675, on the Motion to Adjourn. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 676, on the Motion to Adjourn. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 677, on the Motion to Adjourn. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 678, on the Motion to Adjourn. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 679, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, H.R. 158, the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Ter-rorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 680, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, H.R. 3842, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers Reform and Improvement Act of 2015. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 681, on Consideration of H. Res. 556, Providing for consideration of H.R. 2130, Red River Private Property Protection Act. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 682, on Ordering the Previous Ques-tion for H. Res. 556, Providing for consider-ation of H.R. 2130, Red River Private Property Protection Act. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 683, On Agreeing to H. Res. 556, Providing for consideration of H.R. 2130, Red River Private Property Protection Act. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 684, on Agreeing to the Cole of Okla-homa Amendment No. 2 to H.R. 2130. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 685, on the Motion to Table the Ap-peal of the Ruling of the Chair. I would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 686, on Passage of H.R. 2130, the Red River Private Property Protection Act. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 687, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, H.R. 3578, the DHS Science and Technology Reform and Im-provement Act of 2015. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 688, on the Motion to Table the Ap-peal of the Ruling of the Chair. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 689, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, H.R. 2795, the First Responder Identification of Emergency Needs in Disaster Situations or ‘‘FRIENDS’’ Act. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 690, on Ordering the Previous Ques-tion for H. Res. 560, Providing for consider-ation of the conference report to accompany H.R. 644, the Trade Facilitation and Trade En-forcement Act of 2015 and providing for con-sideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 2250, Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 691, on Agreeing to H. Res. 560, Pro-viding for consideration of the conference re-port to accompany H.R. 644, the Trade Facili-tation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 and providing for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 2250, Making appropria-tions for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016. \nI would have voted ‘‘yes’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 692, on the Motion to Recommit with Instructions the Conference Report for H.R. 644, the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforce-ment Act of 2015. \nI would have voted ‘‘no’’ on Roll Call Vote \nnumber 693, on Agreeing to the Conference Report for H.R. 644, the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015. \nf \nHONORING MAMIE VEST \nHON. H. MORGAN GRIFFITH \nOF VIRGINIA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of \nmyself and Representative B OBGOODLATTE , I \nsubmit these remarks in honor of the life of Mamie Vest of Floyd and Roanoke, Virginia. Mamie was born on August 9, 1938, and was the youngest child of Deputy Sheriff William Lewis Phillips and Cordova Quesenberry Phil-lips. \nThough a native of Floyd County, Mamie’s \ncareer in art was launched by an internship in Charlotte, North Carolina at the Delmar Stu-dios photography business. She returned to Roanoke, where she went on to enjoy her ca-reer in advertising, design, and public rela-tions. She also married the love of her life, Earl Stewart Vest. \nMamie worked as a graphic artist for Roa-\nnoke Engraving, became director of art serv-ices at Brand Edmonds Advertising, and—by the age of 28—founded her own independent business, Mamie Vest Associates. Addition-ally, Mamie also served as a legislative aide in both the Virginia Senate and House of Dele-gates, as well as a long-time advisor to Rep-resentative G\nOODLATTE . \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.040 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1800 December 15, 2015 \nBetween the 1970s and 1990s, Mamie cre-\nated and directed advertising for over 80 local, state, and federal Republican campaigns. She was a talented and fierce trailblazer and, in recognition of her work in advertising, Mamie won the American Advertising Federation’s Sil-ver Medal Award in 1982. \nIn addition to being politically active, Mamie \nwas an active member of our community. She was an active member of the Roanoke City Sign Ordinance Committee, served as Chair-man of the Roanoke City Arts Commission, and served as the Roanoke Valley Coordi-nator for the Virginia Bicentennial Commis-sion. Mamie also was appointed by Governor Linwood Holton to the Consumer Credit Study Commission, by Governor John Dalton to the Advisory Committee on Furnishing and Inter-preting the Executive Mansion, and by Gov-ernor George Allen to the Board of Trustees of the Virginia Museum of Natural History. \nRegrettably, Mamie passed away on No-\nvember 17, 2015. She is survived by her hus-band of 56 years, her granddaughter Sedona Marguerite Hanks, as well as her sister and brother-in-law, George and Ruth Heafner of Greensboro, N.C., Helen Mabry of Cherryville, N.C.; sister-in-law, Barbara Vest of Maryland. Also surviving are many nieces, nephews, great-nieces, great-nephews, and cousins. \nMamie Vest was dedicated to her work and \nher family. She had a tremendous impact on our community and, though she will be greatly missed by many, she will long be remem-bered. We are both honored to have called her a friend. Our thoughts and prayers go out to Mamie’s family and loved ones. May God give them comfort and peace. \nf \nRECOGNIZING THE ANNIVERSARY \nOF DWAYNE AND CAROL CHEST-NUT \nHON. DINA TITUS \nOF NEVADA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMs. TITUS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to rec-\nognize the golden wedding anniversary of Dwayne and Carol Chestnut, two dear friends, respected community leaders, generous phi-lanthropists, and loyal Democrats. They have three children, Kay, Michelle, and Mark, and two grandchildren, Darrel and Danielle Jobe. \nCarol and Dwayne met as teenagers in high \nschool when, coming out of class, he held the door open for her. Carol responded, ‘‘It is good to know that there are still gentlemen and scholars left.’’ Dwayne was smitten and holds the door for Carol still today. \nWhen Carol and Dwayne were courting in \nTexas in the early fifties, their favorite song was ‘‘Too Young’’ by Nat King Cole. Its words were prophetic: ‘‘This love will last though years may go.’’ The joy they find in each other spills over into the numerous lives, including my own, which they have touched over the \nfifty years they have been together. \nCongratulations. Here’s to many more good \ntimes and sweet memories to come. \nf \nANGELO CANDELORI: A LIFETIME \nOF OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERV-ICE \nHON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH \nOF NEW JERSEY \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I \nrise today to express gratitude and deep ap-preciation for the leadership and commitment of one of New Jersey’s most dedicated public servants, Colonel Angelo Candelori. \nFor over 30 years, Colonel Candelori has \nvolunteered countless hours and offered ex-ceptional guidance and insights as a member of the Fourth Congressional District’s Service Academy Nominations Board—a task he has taken most seriously and accomplished with great success. Year after year, Colonel Candelori has ‘‘sweat the details,’’ tediously poring over the applications of prospective Service Academy nominees. With great scru-tiny and wisdom he has interviewed every young man and woman, recommending only those whom he felt were most deserving of my congressional nomination. \nI have benefitted greatly from Colonel \nCandelori’s expertise, discernment, dedication, and desire that our armed services receive the best and brightest possible officer applicants. And so, too, has the United States military. \nHaving served for 32 years in the United \nStates Marine Corps and the reserves—a ten-ure that overlapped with his time on our Serv-ice Academy Board—Colonel Candelori relied on his instinctive knowledge and judgement, as well as years of military training, to help identify young applicants best suited to be-come America’s next generation of military leaders. With honor, integrity, courage and dedication, Colonel Candelori easily embodies the Marine Corps motto ‘‘Semper Fi’’—proving to be ‘‘always faithful’’ to the United States of America, his fellow Marines, and all members of our armed forces. \nIf you knew Colonel Candelori personally, \nyou would know that his dedication to his community and his commitment to public serv-ice is evident beyond his military career. For many years Colonel Candelori was a member of the Hamilton Township Planning Board and the Hamilton Township Development Review Advisory Board. His positive impact in many local and state volunteer and/or civic organiza-tions resulted in his designation as a Point of Light by President George H. W. Bush. Colo-nel Candelori was also named a recipient of the U.S. Secretary of Energy’s Community Service Award and the Enrico Fermi Federa-tion Achievement Award. Recognition of Colonel Candelori’s leader-\nship quality is international as he was knighted with the title of Cavalieri in the Order of Soli-darity by the government of Italy. He served as president of the Societa Cavalieri d’Italia and is a past trustee of the Italian-American National Hall of Fame and a past president of the Enrico Fermi Federation. \nMr. Speaker, to say that Colonel Angelo \nCandelori is a patriot and a gentleman would be an understatement. He is a remarkable, dedicated family man and community leader who has truly advanced the common good. \nThis year, as he steps down from his more \nthan three decades of assisting in the vetting of future uniformed military officers, I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in honoring Colonel Angelo Candelori for his dedicated service to the citizens of New Jersey and to the United States of America. \nf \nIN HONOR OF GOVERNOR TERRY \nBRANSTAD \nHON. ROD BLUM \nOF IOWA \nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTuesday, December 15, 2015 \nMr. BLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in \nhonor of Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, who yesterday became the longest serving gov-ernor in the history of the United States, sur-passing former Vice President George Clinton from New York. \nGovernor Branstad has now served 7,642 \ndays as governor. I salute and congratulate him on his dedication to the state of Iowa and his passion for public service. \nBorn and raised on a farm in Northern Iowa, \nGovernor Branstad’s life has been dedicated to the advancement of the state of Iowa. After a tenure in the United States Army, he served three terms in the Iowa House of Representa-tives and was subsequently elected as the Lieutenant Governor. \nIn 1982, at the age of 35, he was elected \nas the youngest governor in Iowa history. After his first four terms in office, Governor Branstad refocused his boundless energy on continuing to serve the state as the President of Des Moines University. He returned as gov-ernor in 2010 and is currently serving his sixth term. \nDuring his administration, Iowa has seen \nrecord low unemployment rates, as well as an admirable budget surplus. His endless energy and strong work ethic inspires all of us who serve in elected office to constantly strive to improve our performance on behalf of all Iowans. \nThank you, Governor Branstad, for all that \nyou have done for the great state of Iowa and your nearly twenty-one years of service. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:38 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\\CR\\FM\\A15DE8.042 E15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with REMARKS D1320 Tuesday, December 15, 2015 \nDaily Digest \nSenate \nChamber Action \nRoutine Proceedings, pages S8647–8688. \nMeasures Introduced: Five bills and two resolu-\ntions were introduced, as follows: S. 2401–2405, and S. Res. 335–336.\n Page S8684 \nMeasures Reported: \nH.R. 998, to establish the conditions under which \nthe Secretary of Homeland Security may establish preclearance facilities, conduct preclearance oper-ations, and provide customs services outside the United States, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. (S. Rept. No. 114–180) \nS. 1169, to reauthorize and improve the Juvenile \nJustice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. (S. Rept. No. 114–181) \nS. 1318, to amend title 18, United States Code, \nto provide for protection of maritime navigation and prevention of nuclear terrorism, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute.\n Page S8684 \nMeasures Passed: \nPilot’s Bill of Rights 2: Senate passed S. 571, to \namend the Pilot’s Bill of Rights to facilitate appeals and to apply to other certificates issued by the Fed-eral Aviation Administration, to require the revision of the third class medical certification regulations \nissued by the Federal Aviation Administration, after agreeing to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, and the following amendment pro-posed thereto:\n Pages S8674–82 \nInhofe (for Feinstein/Reed) Amendment No. 2928, \nto clarify the administrative authorities and to im-prove the physician certification.\n Page S8678 \nHonoring the Portland Timbers: Senate agreed to \nS. Res. 336, honoring the Portland Timbers as the champions of Major League Soccer in 2015. \n Page S8686 \nNominations—Agreement: A unanimous-consent- \ntime agreement was reached providing that Senate consider individually the following nominations, at a time to be determined by the Majority Leader in consultation with the Democratic Leader: Wilhel-mina Marie Wright, of Minnesota, to be United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, \nJohn Michael Vazquez, of New Jersey, to be United States District Judge for the District of New Jersey, Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, of Iowa, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa, and Leonard Terry Strand, of South Dakota, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa; that there be 30 minutes for debate for each nomination, equally divided in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of time on the respective nomination, Senate vote, without in-tervening action or debate, on confirmation of the nominations.\n Page S8687 \nNominations Status Quo—Agreement: A unani-\nmous-consent agreement was reached providing that all judicial nominations received by the Senate dur-ing the 114th Congress, first session, remain in sta-tus quo, notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXXI, paragraph 6, of the Standing Rules of the Senate.\n Page S8687 \nNominations Confirmed: Senate confirmed the fol-\nlowing nominations: \nAnthony Rosario Coscia, of New Jersey, to be a \nDirector of the Amtrak Board of Directors for a term of five years. \nDerek Tai-Ching Kan, of California, to be a Di-\nrector of the Amtrak Board of Directors for a term of five years. \nDana J. Boente, of Virginia, to be United States \nAttorney for the Eastern District of Virginia for the term of four years. \nRobert Lloyd Capers, of New York, to be United \nStates Attorney for the Eastern District of New York for the term of four years. \nJohn P. Fishwick, Jr., of Virginia, to be United \nStates Attorney for the Western District of Virginia for the term of four years. \nEmily Gray Rice, of New Hampshire, to be \nUnited States Attorney for the District of New Hampshire for the term of four years. \n Pages S8687, S8688 \nMessages from the House: Page S8683 \nEnrolled Bills Presented: Page S8683 \nExecutive Communications: Pages S8683–84 \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:56 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\\CR\\FM\\D15DE5.REC D15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with DIGEST CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST D1321 December 15, 2015 \nExecutive Reports of Committees: Page S8684 \nAdditional Cosponsors: Pages S8684–86 \nStatements on Introduced Bills/Resolutions: \n Page S8686 \nAdditional Statements: Pages S8682–83 \nAmendments Submitted: Pages S8686–87 \nAuthorities for Committees to Meet: Page S8687 \nPrivileges of the Floor: Page S8687 \nAdjournment: Senate convened at 10 a.m. and ad-\njourned at 7:06 p.m., until 11 a.m. on Wednesday, December 16, 2015. (For Senate’s program, see the remarks of the Majority Leader in today’s Record on page S8688.) \nCommittee Meetings \n(Committees not listed did not meet) \nNOMINATIONS \nCommittee on Armed Services: Committee concluded a \nhearing to examine the nominations of Patrick Jo-seph Murphy, of Pennsylvania, to be Under Secretary of the Army, Janine Anne Davidson, of Virginia, to be Under Secretary of the Navy, and Lisa S. Disbrow, of Virginia, to be Under Secretary of the Air Force, all of the Department of Defense, after the nominees testified and answered questions in their own behalf. \nBUSINESS MEETING \nCommittee on Armed Services: Committee ordered favor-\nably reported the nominations of Marcel John Lettre, II, of Maryland, to be Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Gabriel Camarillo, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, and Vice Admi-\nral Kurt W. Tidd, to be Admiral, and Commander, United States Southern Command, all of the Depart-ment of Defense, and John E. Sparks, of Virginia, to be a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. \nAFGHANISTAN \nCommittee on Foreign Relations: Committee received a \nclosed briefing on an assessment of Afghanistan in-telligence from national security briefers. \nTRANSITION ASSISTANCE \nCommittee on Veterans’ Affairs: Committee concluded a \nhearing to examine transition assistance, after receiv-ing testimony from Susan Kelly, Director, Transition to Veterans Program Office, Office of the Under Sec-retary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; Curtis L. Coy, Deputy Under Secretary of Veterans Affairs for Economic Opportunity, Veterans Benefits Ad-ministration; Teresa W. Gerton, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Veterans’ Employment and Training Service; Elizabeth Voticky, The Coca-Cola Company, Atlanta, Georgia; Matthew Kress, Starbucks Coffee Company, Seattle, Washington; Eric Eversole, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Founda-tion, and Daniel Smith, The American Legion, both of Washington, D.C.; and Lieutenant Colonel Mi-chael Zacchea, USMC (Ret.), University of Con-necticut Entrepreneur Bootcamp for Veterans, Hart-ford. \nINTELLIGENCE \nSelect Committee on Intelligence: Committee met in \nclosed session to receive a briefing on certain intel-ligence matters from officials of the intelligence community. \nh \nHouse of Representatives \nChamber Action \nPublic Bills and Resolutions Introduced: 15 pub-\nlic bills, H.R. 4246–4260; and 4 resolutions, H.J. Res. 76–77; H. Con. Res. 102; and H.Res. 565, were introduced.\n Pages H9327–28 \nAdditional Cosponsors: Pages H9329–30 \nReports Filed: Reports were filed today as follows: \nH.R. 3878, to enhance cybersecurity information sharing and coordination at ports in the United States, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 114–379, Part 1); H.R. 2285, to improve enforcement against trafficking in cultural property \nand prevent stolen or illicit cultural property from financing terrorist and criminal networks, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 114–380, Part 1); and Committee on Ethics. In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Jared Polis (H. Rept. 114–381).\n Page H9327 \nSpeaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he \nappointed Representative Kelly (MS) to act as Speak-er pro tempore for today.\n Page H9309 \nRecess: The House recessed at 12:25 p.m. and re-\nconvened at 2 p.m. Page H9313 \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:56 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\\CR\\FM\\D15DE5.REC D15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with DIGEST CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST D1322 December 15, 2015 \nJournal: The House agreed to the Speaker’s approval \nof the Journal by voice vote. Pages H9313, H9322 \nUnited States Holocaust Memorial Council—Ap-pointment: The Chair announced the Speaker’s ap-\npointment of the following Members on the part of the House to the United States Holocaust Memorial Council: Representatives Israel and Deutch. \n Page H9313 \nRecess: The House recessed at 2:05 p.m. and recon-\nvened at 4 p.m. Pages H9313–14 \nSuspensions: The House agreed to suspend the rules \nand agree to the following measure: \nSupporting freedom of the press in Latin Amer-\nica and the Caribbean and condemning violations of press freedom and violence against journalists, bloggers, and individuals exercising their right to freedom of speech: H. Res. 536, amended, sup-\nporting freedom of the press in Latin America and the Caribbean and condemning violations of press freedom and violence against journalists, bloggers, and individuals exercising their right to freedom of speech, by a 2/3 yea-and-nay vote of 399 yeas to 2 nays, Roll No. 694.\n Pages H9318–22 \nRecess: The House recessed at 4:45 p.m. and recon-\nvened at 6:30 p.m. Page H9321 \nAppointing the day for the convening of the sec-ond session of the One Hundredth Fourteenth Congress: The House agreed to H.J. Res. 76, ap-\npointing the day for the convening of the second ses-sion of the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress. \n Page H9322 \nPrivileged Resolution: The House agreed to H. \nCon. Res. 102, providing for a joint session of Con-gress to receive a message from the President. \n Page H9322 \nMeeting Hour: Agreed by unanimous consent that \nwhen the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9 a.m. tomorrow, December 16.\n Page H9322 \nSuspension—Proceedings Postponed: The House \ndebated the following measure under suspension of the rules. Further proceedings were postponed. \nCombat Terrorist Use of Social Media Act of \n2015: H.R. 3654, amended, to require a report on \nUnited States strategy to combat terrorist use of so-cial media.\n Pages H9314–18 \nSenate Message: Message received from the Senate \nby the Clerk and subsequently presented to the House today appears on page H9313. \nSenate Referral: S. 2044 was referred to the Com-\nmittee on Energy and Commerce.\n Page H9326 Quorum Calls—Votes: One yea-and-nay vote de-\nveloped during the proceedings of today and appears on page H9321. There were no quorum calls. \nAdjournment: The House met at 12 noon and ad-\njourned at 7:51 p.m. \nCommittee Meetings \nNo hearings were held. \nJoint Meetings \nNo joint committee meetings were held. \nf \nNEW PUBLIC LAWS \n(For last listing of Public Laws, see DAILY DIGEST , p. D1316) \nH.R. 2250, Further Continuing Appropriations \nAct, 2016. Signed on December 11, 2015. (Public Law 114–96) \nS. 599, to extend and expand the Medicaid emer-\ngency psychiatric demonstration project. Signed on December 11, 2015. (Public Law 114–97) \nS. 611, to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to \nreauthorize technical assistance to small public water systems. Signed on December 11, 2015. (Public Law 114–98) \nS. 1170, to amend title 39, United States Code, \nto extend the authority of the United States Postal Service to issue a semipostal to raise funds for breast cancer research. Signed on December 11, 2015. (Public Law 114–99) \nf \nCOMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR WEDNESDAY, \nDECEMBER 16, 2015 \n(Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated) \nSenate \nCommittee on Foreign Relations: to hold hearings to exam-\nine the Administration’s strategy in Afghanistan, 2:30 p.m., SD–419. \nCommittee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: \nbusiness meeting to consider the nominations of Robert A. Salerno, and Darlene Michele Soltys, both to be an As-sociate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Co-lumbia for the term of fifteen years, 10:55 a.m., SD–338. \nHouse \nCommittee on Financial Services , Subcommittee on Over-\nsight and Investigations, hearing entitled ‘‘Examining the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Mass Data Col-lection Program’’, 10:30 a.m., 2128 Rayburn. \nCommittee on Foreign Affairs , Full Committee, hearing \nentitled ‘‘The Future of U.S.-Pakistan Relations’’, 10 a.m., 2172 Rayburn. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:56 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\\CR\\FM\\D15DE5.REC D15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with DIGEST CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST D1323 December 15, 2015 \nSubcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa, \nhearing entitled ‘‘Egypt Two Years After Morsi (Part II)’’, 1 p.m., 2172 Rayburn. \nCommittee on Oversight and Government Reform , Sub-\ncommittee on Government Operations, hearing entitled ‘‘Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), Office of Gov-\nernment Ethics (OGE), and Office of Special Council (OSC) Reauthorization’’, 10 a.m., 2154 Rayburn. Joint Meetings \nCommission on Security and Cooperation in Europe: to hold \nhearings to examine Azerbaijan’s persecution of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reporter Khadija Ismayilova, 2 p.m., 2200–RHOB. \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:56 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\\CR\\FM\\D15DE5.REC D15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with DIGEST CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST\nCongressional RecordThe Congressional Record (USPS 087–390). The Periodicals postage\nis paid at Washington, D.C. The public proceedings of each Houseof Congress, as reported by the Official Reporters thereof, are\nprinted pursuant to directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by appropriate provisions of Title 44, UnitedStates Code, and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session, excepting very infrequent instances when\ntwo or more unusually small consecutive issues are printed one time. ¶Public access to the Congressional Record is available online through\nthe U.S. Government Publishing Office, at www.fdsys.gov , free of charge to the user. The information is updated online each day the\nCongressional Record is published. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Publishing Office.\nPhone 202–512–1800, or 866–512–1800 (toll-free). E-Mail, contactcenter@gpo.gov . ¶To place an order for any of these products, visit the U.S.\nGovernment Online Bookstore at: bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO63197–9000, or phone orders to 866–512–1800 (toll-free), 202–512–1800 (D.C. area), or fax to 202–512–2104. Remit check or money order, made\npayable to the Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, or GPO Deposit Account. ¶Follo wing\neach session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the Superintendent of Documents\nin individual parts or by sets. ¶With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no restrictions on the republication of material from\nthe Congressional Record .\nPOSTMASTER: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Record , U.S. Government Publishing Office,\nWashington, D.C. 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.UNUMEPLURIBUSD1324 December 15, 2015 \nNext Meeting of the SENATE \n11 a.m., Wednesday, December 16 \nSenate Chamber \nProgram for Wednesday: Senate will be in a period of \nmorning business until 6 p.m. Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \n9 a.m., Wednesday, December 16 \nHouse Chamber \nProgram for Wednesday: Consideration of the following \nmeasures under suspension of the rules: 1) H.R. 3750— First Responders Passport Act of 2015; 2) H.R. 2241— Global Health Innovation Act of 2015; 3) Concur in the Senate Amendment to H.R. 2297—Hizballah Inter-national Financing Prevention Act of 2015; 4) H.R. 3878—Strengthening Cybersecurity Information Sharing and Coordination in Our Ports Act of 2015; 5) Concur in the Senate Amendment to H.R. 2820—Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Authorization Act of 2015; and 6) S. 1347—Electronic Health Fairness Act of 2015. \nExtensions of Remarks, as inserted in this issue \nHOUSE \nAguilar, Pete, Calif., E1799 \nBeyer, Donald S., Jr., Va. E1795 Blum, Rod, Iowa, E1800 Blumenauer, Earl, Ore., E1794 Bordallo, Madeleine Z., Guam, E1797 Buck, Ken, Colo., E1792 Butterfield, G.K., N.C., E1798 Cartwright, Matt, Pa., E1791, E1796 Chabot, Steve, Ohio, E1792 Cohen, Steve, Tenn., E1790, E1793 Comstock, Barbara, Va., E1788 Davis, Danny K., Ill., E1793 DesJarlais, Scott, Tenn., E1787 Dingell, Debbie, Mich., E1793 Forbes, J. Randy, Va., E1797 \nGohmert, Louie, Tex., E1789 Griffith, H. Morgan, Va., E1799 Guinta, Frank C., N.H., E1796 Hastings, Alcee L., Fla., E1794 Hudson, Richard, N.C., E1792 Issa, Darrell E., Calif., E1790 Katko, John, N.Y., E1787 Marchant, Kenny, Tex., E1795 McCarthy, Kevin, Calif., E1796 McSally, Martha, Ariz., E1788 Norton, Eleanor Holmes, The District of Columbia, \nE1794 \nPayne, Donald M., Jr., N.J., E1789 Perry, Scott, Pa., E1792, E1796, E1797 Poe, Ted, Tex., E1791, E1798 Ryan, Paul D., Wisc., E1787 \nSablan, Gregorio Kilili Camacho, Northern Mariana \nIslands, E1789 \nSewell, Terri A., Ala., E1793 Smith, Christopher H., N.J., E1800 Titus, Dina, Nev., E1800 Trott, David A., Mich., E1789 Van Hollen, Chris, Md., E1791 Veasey, Marc A., Tex., E1795 Walker, Mark, N.C., E1795 Westmoreland, Lynn A., Ga., E1787 Williams, Roger, Tex., E1797 \nWilson, Joe, S.C., E1795 Young, David, Iowa, E1787, E1791, E1791, E1792, E1793, \nE1794, E1795, E1796, E1797, E1799 \nVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:56 Dec 16, 2015 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0664 Sfmt 0664 E:\\CR\\FM\\D15DE5.REC D15DEPT1emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with DIGEST" }

[ 0.031102918088436127, -0.03540828824043274, 0.0021502641029655933, -0.039509523659944534, 0.08742904663085938, -0.008505558595061302, -0.018971456214785576, -0.03988179191946983, -0.04586014524102211, -0.020223382860422134, 0.024608038365840912, 0.008407196961343288, -0.06060335785150528, -0.07474029064178467, 0.003977901302278042, -0.00007098317291820422, 0.0037665250711143017, -0.006598977837711573, -0.029412129893898964, -0.05069475620985031, 0.04596584290266037, 0.03647815063595772, -0.018762990832328796, 0.03957648202776909, -0.03733817860484123, 0.05636949464678764, 0.005028936546295881, 0.050702646374702454, -0.06115513667464256, -0.03157078102231026, -0.031993020325899124, 0.06696014851331711, 0.08012831956148148, 0.026427719742059708, -0.010424916632473469, 0.047434668987989426, -0.034364666789770126, -0.02651425637304783, -0.022098690271377563, 0.007606213446706533, 0.09613948315382004, -0.06516599655151367, 0.024875402450561523, 0.0072458223439753056, -0.06127392128109932, 0.03609028458595276, -0.07734414935112, 0.016683945432305336, -0.037022143602371216, -0.01990719698369503, 0.04093404859304428, -0.04831790551543236, 0.0442754402756691, -0.028929496183991432, -0.00845767930150032, -0.01939471997320652, -0.057229455560445786, -0.07875162363052368, 0.021135514602065086, -0.021649129688739777, 0.1100231409072876, -0.013948963023722172, 0.009624647907912731, 0.024258319288492203, 0.05375104770064354, -0.013359971344470978, -0.03790786862373352, -0.002262261463329196, -0.09183181077241898, -0.13136455416679382, 0.04639405384659767, -0.01766481064260006, -0.028441140428185463, 0.054353777319192886, 0.0005878026713617146, -0.0034623295068740845, 0.040035706013441086, 0.0877218246459961, 0.11951152235269547, -0.08249126374721527, 0.028261469677090645, 0.013031497597694397, 0.04722505435347557, 0.045590322464704514, -0.04195516183972359, -0.007265928667038679, -0.0011745552765205503, 0.027976905927062035, 0.013965481892228127, -0.08148112893104553, -0.016298338770866394, -0.050235264003276825, -0.04021475464105606, -0.03934834152460098, 0.012563413940370083, 0.027788925915956497, -0.03953501954674721, -0.1729346215724945, -0.05014752969145775, -0.006161920260637999, -0.03414427489042282, -0.09179602563381195, -0.010976807214319706, -0.07710243761539459, -0.0914081260561943, -0.012447649613022804, -0.08232720196247101, 0.05493521690368652, 0.026578158140182495, 0.06049036979675293, -0.01732775755226612, 0.058490585535764694, 0.02354956418275833, 0.06147122010588646, -0.010171984322369099, -0.024401424452662468, -0.011482306756079197, -0.004311592783778906, 0.00481756404042244, -0.1044766753911972, -0.0026473875623196363, -0.009175804443657398, 0.019037479534745216, -0.06793075054883957, 0.04831763729453087, -0.01352487038820982, -0.09442216157913208, 5.0744581349441314e-33, -0.0054204403422772884, -0.013518118299543858, 0.020920492708683014, 0.03413020446896553, 0.046309079974889755, -0.0012838160619139671, 0.06503967940807343, 0.04839801788330078, -0.029607359319925308, 0.0004015479935333133, -0.022779932245612144, 0.020125076174736023, 0.04090820625424385, 0.027326447889208794, 0.026256363838911057, -0.0512276217341423, 0.025729967281222343, -0.015944508835673332, 0.025141792371869087, -0.07830359786748886, 0.020270714536309242, 0.038584355264902115, -0.011928491294384003, 0.06420473009347916, 0.05105409026145935, -0.048987194895744324, -0.03625302016735077, -0.07671978324651718, 0.07811243832111359, 0.057914119213819504, 0.057501502335071564, -0.02680196240544319, 0.019437504932284355, 0.01503845490515232, -0.02553635835647583, 0.03399088978767395, -0.02830769121646881, -0.07287293672561646, -0.02875891886651516, -0.024132372811436653, 0.08853500336408615, 0.06612561643123627, 0.013336452655494213, 0.02246387116611004, -0.005089683458209038, 0.11810971796512604, 0.05223265290260315, 0.011004070751369, 0.06176387146115303, 0.090157151222229, -0.09261772781610489, 0.03296642377972603, -0.02228536829352379, -0.007821690291166306, 0.03193549066781998, -0.002790530677884817, -0.08107893168926239, -0.026269856840372086, 0.004581875167787075, -0.04090709239244461, 0.013132605701684952, 0.11018391698598862, -0.06518267840147018, -0.025549259036779404, -0.08141466975212097, -0.06583844125270844, 0.030330929905176163, -0.004289222415536642, 0.013930442743003368, 0.08555901050567627, 0.03470049053430557, -0.03244434669613838, -0.050512395799160004, -0.02025909163057804, -0.043690700083971024, -0.0189786646515131, -0.03169010579586029, 0.08802001923322678, 0.008982439525425434, -0.057684414088726044, -0.01600380800664425, 0.06623908132314682, -0.045577675104141235, 0.015152833424508572, 0.0024648120161145926, -0.02016018144786358, -0.0080834049731493, -0.007057080511003733, -0.07307950407266617, 0.018956447020173073, -0.01697930134832859, 0.08673021197319031, -0.004822865594178438, -0.01274111308157444, -0.015826592221856117, -5.9124199358453534e-33, -0.05720843747258186, -0.05422884225845337, 0.04690420627593994, 0.06161503866314888, 0.02335391566157341, -0.04802169278264046, 0.023137586191296577, -0.03860391676425934, 0.05230597406625748, -0.02308218739926815, -0.030549567192792892, 0.04988081753253937, -0.007155266590416431, -0.015600068494677544, -0.024598246440291405, 0.040556326508522034, -0.0030501491855829954, 0.023715445771813393, 0.015665723010897636, -0.039393212646245956, -0.02454392798244953, 0.11363879591226578, -0.03408433124423027, -0.06332724541425705, -0.007830044254660606, 0.002278561471030116, 0.018883097916841507, 0.06390441954135895, -0.021589891985058784, -0.09115875512361526, -0.04547795653343201, -0.09990242123603821, -0.07507354021072388, 0.019043872132897377, -0.09608948230743408, -0.009536965750157833, 0.057608455419540405, -0.08183714002370834, -0.06111617386341095, -0.018118439242243767, 0.05540213733911514, -0.0942452922463417, -0.07761494070291519, 0.11185363680124283, -0.018879113718867302, -0.0671321377158165, 0.030051782727241516, -0.004185689613223076, 0.036730196326971054, 0.01556282490491867, 0.03548235818743706, -0.023689599707722664, 0.012642620131373405, 0.053188521414995193, -0.043980445712804794, -0.01218950655311346, 0.11891097575426102, 0.031115053221583366, -0.11501630395650864, 0.01575234718620777, 0.027024419978260994, 0.07514108717441559, 0.003952812869101763, 0.05828750506043434, 0.05247274786233902, -0.07992666214704514, 0.07728467881679535, -0.04638981446623802, 0.03538743034005165, -0.10611940920352936, 0.02184836007654667, -0.07726068049669266, -0.062143247574567795, -0.01221778616309166, -0.011429058387875557, 0.017505329102277756, 0.01610453426837921, 0.020383324474096298, -0.0008000109810382128, -0.00984294805675745, 0.003671172307804227, -0.004857249557971954, 0.026940368115901947, 0.05125393718481064, 0.11032536625862122, 0.016988355666399002, 0.07197368144989014, -0.052861690521240234, 0.07941889762878418, 0.07658082246780396, -0.08169370144605637, 0.03986881673336029, 0.019854262471199036, 0.05593462660908699, -0.0077504683285951614, -5.73883731647129e-8, 0.03139394149184227, -0.018926937133073807, -0.04061419516801834, 0.0332232229411602, 0.02534027211368084, -0.012522801756858826, 0.045709528028964996, 0.045106273144483566, -0.027819793671369553, 0.08517785370349884, -0.03705350682139397, 0.08787304908037186, -0.06515000760555267, 0.06220953166484833, 0.1065298318862915, -0.09344654530286789, 0.006421842146664858, 0.08027967810630798, -0.06919583678245544, 0.022589631378650665, -0.04658367857336998, 0.06328415125608444, -0.05216025188565254, -0.06719306111335754, -0.0006603005458600819, -0.04547655209898949, 0.004665951710194349, -0.1321486532688141, 0.01871900074183941, -0.0013684320729225874, 0.014652368612587452, 0.04894115403294563, 0.024774178862571716, 0.014419813640415668, -0.05063578113913536, 0.0001641959825064987, -0.11611571907997131, 0.04006025195121765, 0.08102425932884216, -0.005385059397667646, -0.014330658130347729, 0.05081731453537941, 0.014847234822809696, 0.041919466108083725, -0.0032099075615406036, 0.026136940345168114, -0.058765705674886703, -0.005309572443366051, 0.04306789115071297, -0.00046631062286905944, -0.09891044348478317, -0.04288787022233009, 0.061338845640420914, 0.03379622474312782, 0.013711733743548393, -0.060020193457603455, -0.011119441129267216, -0.0696231871843338, 0.13029837608337402, 0.020449351519346237, 0.10660342127084732, -0.03330690786242485, -0.013798930682241917, 0.0776188001036644 ]

{ "pdf_file": "EQDIZLFPMDEBKUMF53WGJTJNZCBWBPPH.pdf", "text": "Ledbetter Farms, Inc.\n1377 ELOOT AVENUE •LODI, CALIFORNIA 95240 •TELEPHONE (209) 334-6975\nOctober 14, 2005 Comment 8\nToWhom It May Concern:\nI am writing in support of the new proposed Lodi AVA's. Having been a part of\nthe steering committee, I feel that we did a thorough job in our research and science.\nThese new AVA's will help distinguish each of the outlined areas to our consumers by\ndefining each of the unique AVA's within the Lodi region and establish individual\ncharacteristics.\nAs mentioned above, I am in complete suppon of the Lodi AVA petition.\nLedbetter Farms, Inc.\n" }

[ -0.07460377365350723, 0.04136912524700165, 0.02843436412513256, -0.05906296148896217, -0.018420254811644554, 0.07679687440395355, 0.07673919945955276, 0.010172414593398571, 0.07750553637742996, 0.0832582339644432, 0.0992017611861229, -0.04503731429576874, -0.001096632331609726, 0.0040857791900634766, -0.007552635855972767, -0.00198891619220376, 0.061671290546655655, 0.005644311662763357, -0.04431520029902458, -0.06369251012802124, -0.0071645076386630535, 0.053593654185533524, -0.01879637874662876, -0.006107456516474485, -0.03825092315673828, -0.020194290205836296, -0.06464661657810211, 0.017820147797465324, 0.07709946483373642, -0.05701408162713051, 0.002669036155566573, -0.008677858859300613, -0.014644114300608635, 0.0078079067170619965, 0.08423453569412231, 0.06589434295892715, 0.04549147188663483, -0.04874645918607712, 0.050639018416404724, -0.02519034780561924, -0.006892316974699497, -0.06627207249403, 0.02244679071009159, -0.06537359207868576, 0.07173313945531845, 0.011022457852959633, 0.09311351925134659, 0.0023286016657948494, -0.08098384737968445, -0.006268244236707687, 0.08508241176605225, -0.022187478840351105, 0.008291379548609257, 0.05748163163661957, -0.04392283037304878, 0.057578567415475845, 0.11213582754135132, 0.006436532363295555, -0.004406718537211418, 0.048419613391160965, -0.03991694748401642, 0.023634787648916245, -0.06196487694978714, -0.030563484877347946, -0.01597621850669384, -0.049776677042245865, 0.007329221349209547, -0.03895149752497673, 0.022832583636045456, 0.016265951097011566, 0.07159998267889023, -0.06532373279333115, 0.05918070301413536, -0.03139184042811394, 0.02195015922188759, 0.009412181563675404, -0.029233427718281746, 0.12124525755643845, 0.11253702640533447, -0.1575673371553421, 0.009262963198125362, 0.055548183619976044, 0.009967761114239693, -0.06026465818285942, -0.024702930822968483, -0.07134778052568436, -0.01066410169005394, 0.10237680375576019, 0.09885072708129883, -0.002697503427043557, 0.06326024979352951, 0.018028106540441513, 0.012612181715667248, 0.003794298740103841, -0.002258779713883996, 0.010210463777184486, -0.03664461895823479, 0.02670620195567608, 0.009498368948698044, 0.07909318059682846, 0.015812480822205544, 0.037209540605545044, -0.055673565715551376, -0.024255279451608658, -0.026356473565101624, -0.051485199481248856, -0.02137392945587635, -0.010420205071568489, -0.020937586203217506, -0.03641970083117485, -0.03857943415641785, -0.024491017684340477, 0.023491734638810158, -0.049861278384923935, -0.00003611058127717115, 0.06593111157417297, -0.08230270445346832, 0.02810019440948963, 0.018384933471679688, -0.0776507779955864, 0.043850578367710114, 0.02446337230503559, -0.04305968061089516, -0.023762518540024757, 0.03783063217997551, -0.0402669720351696, 0.016731824725866318, 1.583231464136291e-33, 0.03921419009566307, 0.03254653885960579, -0.05932190269231796, 0.05749933421611786, 0.014584722928702831, -0.013265470042824745, 0.056574687361717224, -0.007044605910778046, 0.034152377396821976, 0.01671968400478363, 0.011792760342359543, 0.049220453947782516, 0.016205819323658943, -0.0653902143239975, -0.08362405002117157, -0.08225540816783905, 0.06645409762859344, 0.004688810091465712, -0.040227703750133514, 0.03630383685231209, 0.09262200444936752, -0.05763512849807739, 0.017867114394903183, 0.08403126150369644, 0.09033844619989395, 0.009024610742926598, -0.06493887305259705, 0.03627953678369522, -0.03496169298887253, 0.027681494131684303, 0.03628140687942505, 0.03486616164445877, 0.1030612513422966, -0.02163374237716198, -0.02445685863494873, -0.019276496022939682, -0.004478510934859514, -0.0217294879257679, -0.029419856145977974, -0.042862024158239365, 0.028955096378922462, 0.05457442253828049, -0.016372909769415855, 0.03087223879992962, -0.03510662168264389, 0.0032239151187241077, 0.039088573306798935, -0.05881890282034874, 0.09516774117946625, 0.00956358015537262, 0.05560097098350525, 0.028956890106201172, 0.00021554356499109417, 0.03536159545183182, 0.037758465856313705, -0.030986139550805092, -0.07225465029478073, -0.0014495435170829296, 0.018518690019845963, 0.03187749162316322, 0.03156794607639313, 0.04670189693570137, -0.057227034121751785, 0.08920542895793915, -0.0426185205578804, -0.03967310115695, -0.042398881167173386, -0.018862254917621613, 0.09010997414588928, -0.08350327610969543, -0.044975146651268005, 0.05045168474316597, 0.022735539823770523, -0.032805848866701126, -0.01043559517711401, -0.0758122131228447, -0.0472852922976017, 0.04022521898150444, -0.013870620168745518, -0.062296632677316666, -0.02921992912888527, -0.02021658979356289, 0.028790781274437904, 0.06169658899307251, 0.04007856175303459, -0.041075725108385086, 0.06538502126932144, -0.032767023891210556, 0.004992063157260418, -0.016257062554359436, -0.01597384363412857, 0.03837237134575844, 0.04172162339091301, 0.12378023564815521, 0.016264518722891808, -2.0069035054016445e-33, 0.0413326695561409, -0.039745867252349854, -0.07504813373088837, -0.018722858279943466, -0.038837842643260956, 0.02260557748377323, -0.02752533182501793, -0.07119850814342499, 0.017123110592365265, -0.03622709587216377, -0.07398805022239685, -0.04063229262828827, -0.01862586848437786, 0.01671786420047283, -0.0781145840883255, -0.021125758066773415, 0.042303282767534256, -0.02933334745466709, -0.02122602052986622, 0.07167884707450867, 0.031227929517626762, 0.06340766698122025, 0.08401742577552795, -0.06467104703187943, -0.032400861382484436, 0.03912724554538727, 0.04245004430413246, -0.06565936654806137, -0.05388858914375305, 0.03932823985815048, -0.008602495305240154, -0.040704675018787384, -0.1484854370355606, 0.07190098613500595, 0.0066209170036017895, -0.1439630687236786, 0.08548741787672043, -0.017393767833709717, -0.07071800529956818, 0.05644122138619423, 0.10256348550319672, 0.062212251126766205, -0.0029462813399732113, 0.0328037403523922, -0.05646473169326782, -0.01929841749370098, -0.006846744101494551, -0.10735299438238144, -0.04899537190794945, -0.014651274308562279, -0.006657559424638748, -0.033084847033023834, 0.006881650537252426, -0.010247094556689262, 0.0058131436817348, 0.08317979425191879, 0.026945818215608597, -0.04479989409446716, 0.005171176977455616, -0.004419938661158085, 0.05010344088077545, 0.042584825307130814, -0.02634345181286335, -0.05050729960203171, 0.12800046801567078, -0.0023064217530190945, 0.0050934841856360435, 0.005448890384286642, 0.14588478207588196, 0.00844399631023407, 0.027119437232613564, -0.07798177003860474, -0.0925648957490921, -0.059600379317998886, 0.055176082998514175, 0.007883003912866116, 0.024311011657118797, -0.08577284216880798, -0.04615813493728638, 0.012532191351056099, -0.06799362599849701, -0.014216843992471695, -0.017678000032901764, -0.00976200308650732, -0.004482870921492577, 0.019525283947587013, 0.03045184351503849, -0.08698426187038422, 0.04722905531525612, 0.046328961849212646, -0.03677875176072121, -0.055906031280756, 0.11454630643129349, 0.013485257513821125, -0.002087763510644436, -6.220482617891321e-8, -0.08331919461488724, 0.03681301325559616, -0.08611930161714554, -0.019563177600502968, 0.09266117960214615, -0.026736510917544365, -0.042689669877290726, -0.012871617451310158, 0.03261768817901611, -0.01935318298637867, 0.0656447485089302, -0.0727672427892685, -0.02510485053062439, -0.020397309213876724, -0.03894774615764618, 0.020345212891697884, -0.0077214534394443035, -0.033746033906936646, -0.09592051059007645, -0.10189210623502731, -0.05561819672584534, 0.047422949224710464, -0.021816741675138474, -0.04153604060411453, -0.03105866350233555, -0.03331690654158592, -0.0073006064631044865, 0.07844394445419312, -0.035476204007864, 0.08067411184310913, -0.052293479442596436, -0.011511200107634068, -0.009224050678312778, -0.031550757586956024, 0.032034046947956085, 0.007508212234824896, 0.07008402049541473, -0.05895130708813667, 0.028177859261631966, 0.03823406994342804, -0.04345010966062546, 0.015902595594525337, 0.07419098913669586, 0.04719902575016022, 0.054626837372779846, -0.036892425268888474, -0.051511626690626144, -0.07271673530340195, 0.02787710353732109, -0.09891445934772491, 0.05389143526554108, -0.07788680493831635, -0.004828290082514286, 0.08492029458284378, 0.027421701699495316, -0.012902410700917244, 0.04759366065263748, 0.018123699352145195, 0.012398207560181618, 0.0028192850295454264, -0.03039298765361309, -0.03637928515672684, -0.01221606507897377, -0.06381986290216446 ]

{ "pdf_file": "DTMCZXA4EUHAELLHVHGOH573C4OZ7KM4.pdf", "text": "206 48 CFR Ch. 8 (10–1–05 Edition) 833.106 \nmade until the matter is resolved, un-\nless the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Acquisition and Materiel Management, Acquisition Resources Service, or the Chief Facilities Management Officer, Office of Facilities Management, as ap-propriate, approves the head of con-tracting activity findings required by FAR 33.104(b)(1) and GAO has been no-tified pursuant to FAR 33.104(b)(2). \n(c) Protests after award. Protests after \naward shall be handled in a manner consistent with procedures identified for protests before award. Although persons involved or affected by the fil-ing of a protest may be limited, at least the contractor shall be furnished the notice of the protest and its basis by the contracting officer. When VA re-ceives from GAO, within ten calendar \ndays after award, a notice of protest \nfiled directly with GAO, and it is deter-mined by the head of the contracting activity pursuant to FAR 33.104(c)(2) that contract performance should be authorized, the written findings will first be approved by the Deputy Assist-ant Secretary for Acquisition and Ma-teriel Management, Acquisition Re-sources Service (or the Chief Facilities Management Officer, Office of Facili-ties Management, as appropriate), and the GAO must be notified as required by FAR 33.104(c)(3). \n[51 FR 23070, June 25, 1986, as amended at 52 \nFR 28560, July 31, 1987; 54 FR 40065, Sept. 29, 1989; 58 FR 48974, Sept. 21, 1993; 61 FR 11586, Mar. 21, 1996; 64 FR 69221, Dec. 16, 1998] \n833.106 Solicitation provision. \n(a) The contracting officer shall in-\nsert the provision at 852.233–70, Protest Content, in each solicitation where the total value of all contract awards under the solicitation is expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. \n(b) The contracting officer shall in-\nsert the provision at 852.233–71, Alter-nate Protest Procedure, in each solici-tation where the total value of all con-tract awards under the solicitation is expected to exceed the simplified ac-quisition threshold. \n[63 FR 15319, Mar. 31, 1998] Subpart 833.2—Disputes and \nAppeals \n833.209 Suspected fraudulent claims. \nMatters relating to suspected fraudu-\nlent claims will be referred to the As-sistant Inspector General, Office of In-vestigations (51) for investigation and referral to the Department of Justice. No collection, recovery or other settle-ment action will be initiated while the matter is in the hands of the Depart-ment of Justice without first obtaining the concurrence of the U.S. Attorney concerned, through the Inspector Gen-eral. \n[51 FR 23070, June 25, 1986] \n833.211 Contracting officer’s decision. \n(a) When a dispute cannot be settled \nby agreement and a final decision under the Disputes clause of the con-tract is necessary, the contracting offi-cer shall furnish the contractor his/her final decision in the matter. \n(b) The decision must be identified as \na final decision, be in writing, and in-clude a statement of facts in sufficient detail to enable the contractor to fully understand the decision and the basis on which it was made. It will normally be in the form of a statement of the claim or other description of the dis-pute with necessary references to the pertinent contract provisions. It will set forth those facts relevant to the dispute, with which the contractor and the contracting officer are in agree-ment, and as clearly as possible, the area of disagreement. \n(c) Except as provided in paragraph \n(d) of this section, the decision shall, in addition to the material required by FAR 33.211(a)(4), contain the following: \nThe Department of Veterans Affairs Board \nof Contract Appeals (VABCA) is the author-ized representative of the Secretary for hear-ing and determining such disputes. The rules of the VABCA are published in section 1.783, of Title 38, Code of Federal Regulations. The address of the Board is 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420. \n[51 FR 23070, June 25, 1986, as amended at 52 \nFR 28561, July 31, 1987; 54 FR 40065, Sept. 29, 1989; 61 FR 20492, May 7, 1996] \nVerDate Aug<31>2005 11:01 Oct 31, 2005 Jkt 205204 PO 00000 Frm 00216 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\\SGML\\205204.XXX 205204" }

[ -0.05280990153551102, 0.012490924447774887, -0.056098684668540955, -0.047259699553251266, -0.004834788851439953, -0.04179549589753151, 0.019917180761694908, -0.0028503232169896364, -0.05907641723752022, 0.006185946054756641, 0.062093980610370636, -0.033359918743371964, -0.09774207323789597, 0.05364493280649185, -0.0669102594256401, 0.051922351121902466, 0.035948894917964935, -0.04196959361433983, -0.07199007272720337, 0.12039852887392044, 0.06416016817092896, -0.014058935455977917, -0.02273518592119217, 0.028621580451726913, -0.06606639921665192, 0.014853226020932198, -0.09577777981758118, 0.016628190875053406, 0.009655348025262356, 0.0056767696514725685, -0.022173063829541206, 0.06820123642683029, 0.04110114648938179, 0.03368980437517166, 0.07518450915813446, -0.0636606365442276, -0.02246781997382641, -0.08444424718618393, -0.06086340546607971, 0.02182583697140217, 0.03172355517745018, 0.03505941852927208, -0.030913475900888443, 0.13513384759426117, -0.029759129509329796, 0.06350776553153992, 0.03740716353058815, -0.00230948138050735, 0.0010641515254974365, 0.03984914347529411, -0.065919890999794, 0.0020680699963122606, 0.03948558121919632, 0.019177256152033806, 0.10385989397764206, 0.011603128165006638, -0.07388806343078613, -0.02947830967605114, 0.022347116842865944, -0.02831932343542576, 0.010780161246657372, 0.0332198366522789, -0.08196555823087692, 0.008514716289937496, -0.07429198920726776, -0.039098914712667465, -0.07587391883134842, -0.035683974623680115, -0.008243211545050144, 0.0746186152100563, 0.12479648739099503, -0.0036785807460546494, -0.08454791456460953, -0.0077266329899430275, 0.014112203381955624, 0.05935350060462952, 0.05361614003777504, -0.03336656093597412, 0.036205634474754333, -0.08161001652479172, -0.11366146057844162, -0.051691871136426926, 0.012254990637302399, -0.06334921717643738, 0.03574559465050697, -0.027577050030231476, -0.005203557200729847, 0.058441124856472015, -0.046795524656772614, 0.09015144407749176, 0.028183136135339737, 0.07243678718805313, 0.05248944088816643, -0.0062708985060453415, -0.061596255749464035, 0.05696892365813255, -0.0012055441038683057, -0.05591190978884697, -0.00363792828284204, 0.04243031516671181, 0.013812725432217121, 0.04406636208295822, 0.0016429617535322905, -0.030834533274173737, -0.009522020816802979, 0.006350792944431305, 0.030269429087638855, 0.02005760371685028, -0.05868307873606682, -0.007247390225529671, -0.036698851734399796, 0.04357095807790756, 0.049165673553943634, 0.028721971437335014, -0.04352906346321106, 0.04901733621954918, -0.037926316261291504, 0.023735711351037025, 0.0924675315618515, 0.013323033228516579, 0.015074487775564194, 0.044434111565351486, 0.04348508268594742, 0.045023564249277115, 0.03266121819615364, 0.054086387157440186, -0.07076621055603027, -6.848361027597536e-33, 0.022203316912055016, -0.08517644554376602, -0.04461183026432991, -0.01396496593952179, -0.01138865202665329, -0.04150807112455368, -0.015813162550330162, 0.0024376811925321817, -0.004926466848701239, 0.04902375862002373, -0.03717469424009323, -0.030614979565143585, 0.004237143322825432, -0.09554695338010788, 0.06696172058582306, -0.005854806397110224, 0.049687135964632034, 0.0037791086360812187, 0.042337898164987564, 0.01703665591776371, 0.06484053283929825, -0.12688535451889038, 0.030034692957997322, -0.008878973312675953, 0.010622589848935604, 0.016561321914196014, -0.04951544478535652, -0.08317984640598297, 0.033393535763025284, 0.07769086956977844, 0.004594861995428801, -0.06499065458774567, -0.004013485740870237, 0.003953991923481226, -0.011068101041018963, 0.01746373437345028, 0.10495804250240326, -0.019613375887274742, -0.01947721093893051, -0.02265658602118492, -0.0005094577209092677, -0.08156609535217285, -0.008687580935657024, -0.015674086287617683, -0.03362467512488365, -0.07913640141487122, 0.054885249584913254, 0.02083469368517399, -0.05512218549847603, 0.04899218678474426, 0.008532270789146423, -0.031805772334337234, 0.057595398277044296, -0.019809730350971222, -0.05419577285647392, -0.004075006116181612, -0.024126186966896057, 0.03289855644106865, 0.004783192649483681, -0.020251359790563583, -0.04407329857349396, 0.006997980643063784, 0.002173207700252533, -0.00016508623957633972, 0.10871383547782898, 0.04523088037967682, 0.03458719328045845, -0.00892280787229538, -0.07732155174016953, -0.020186057314276695, 0.0429406575858593, -0.07410722970962524, -0.02932138741016388, -0.011142682284116745, -0.013748579658567905, -0.006685409229248762, 0.07470471411943436, 0.004759421572089195, 0.006844104267656803, 0.023928476497530937, -0.06469117850065231, 0.1022379994392395, 0.01524584274739027, 0.0008791576256044209, -0.04171540588140488, -0.03058670647442341, 0.07852434366941452, 0.013038055039942265, 0.011620623990893364, 0.022766202688217163, -0.043438587337732315, -0.15886588394641876, 0.003996547311544418, -0.07527047395706177, -0.002937845652922988, 3.8701546216350975e-33, -0.06943073868751526, 0.04539956897497177, -0.08930379897356033, -0.016806982457637787, 0.048682209104299545, -0.07536769658327103, 0.028240185230970383, 0.08426469564437866, 0.005100964568555355, -0.1528894305229187, -0.10948610305786133, -0.008867203257977962, 0.029542557895183563, 0.00826985016465187, -0.007713780738413334, -0.016269609332084656, -0.02167360670864582, 0.04626280069351196, -0.017604682594537735, -0.08473322540521622, -0.00489747803658247, -0.019552437588572502, 0.02373398467898369, 0.19497670233249664, 0.0000879142462508753, 0.06781239062547684, 0.0012930920347571373, 0.016993103548884392, -0.042495306581258774, -0.008209077641367912, 0.012766627594828606, 0.018836084753274918, 0.009066322818398476, 0.00661053042858839, -0.06324447691440582, 0.008934230543673038, -0.013458705507218838, 0.06696963310241699, 0.0546879805624485, 0.05473025143146515, 0.08134666085243225, -0.05635753273963928, 0.062043070793151855, 0.02907906472682953, -0.028506115078926086, -0.009726624004542828, 0.040670644491910934, 0.05316722393035889, 0.07829538732767105, 0.013750591315329075, -0.022528568282723427, 0.024875711649656296, -0.0033561300951987505, 0.027702094987034798, 0.04715980589389801, 0.00579552398994565, 0.08961733430624008, -0.04459264501929283, -0.05095202848315239, -0.11212499439716339, -0.018096935003995895, 0.03256843239068985, -0.0875878557562828, 0.082215815782547, 0.03783445432782173, 0.022385703399777412, 0.030790256336331367, -0.046186648309230804, -0.006664380431175232, -0.008418755605816841, -0.01818661019206047, -0.006289432290941477, -0.007785635534673929, 0.008742802776396275, -0.07727501541376114, 0.035509608685970306, 0.06622960418462753, 0.0588066391646862, 0.08287310600280762, 0.009149379096925259, -0.03299589082598686, -0.010995099321007729, 0.027433667331933975, 0.04434081166982651, 0.013623317703604698, -0.002763968426734209, -0.018442684784531593, -0.013623143546283245, -0.014279167167842388, -0.02147996611893177, -0.01919557712972164, -0.03798095881938934, -0.11101501435041428, 0.030806375667452812, 0.004736965987831354, -4.8467569513377384e-8, 0.0880722925066948, 0.1077108159661293, 0.003421712899580598, 0.06325653195381165, 0.06566032767295837, 0.04415170103311539, 0.04634670168161392, -0.046105679124593735, -0.023786472156643867, -0.01835581287741661, 0.09298817813396454, -0.015554003417491913, 0.03200513869524002, -0.04128361865878105, -0.04377954453229904, 0.024675888940691948, -0.01457731518894434, -0.0620659738779068, -0.05941038206219673, -0.08788327127695084, -0.04808398336172104, -0.008140210062265396, 0.02546638436615467, 0.0021082276944071054, -0.08014567196369171, -0.043889496475458145, -0.09230220317840576, -0.02083890698850155, 0.08421903103590012, -0.002611991250887513, 0.03452986106276512, -0.006265819072723389, 0.020075736567378044, 0.004441540688276291, 0.03951587900519371, -0.03954189643263817, -0.09443394839763641, 0.002715717302635312, -0.02544066309928894, 0.04470924660563469, -0.11661691218614578, 0.021058233454823494, -0.01752462610602379, 0.016798948869109154, -0.05460372194647789, 0.023745844140648842, -0.03794003650546074, 0.034358568489551544, 0.012230456806719303, -0.06031423062086105, -0.0014654757687821984, -0.01202293299138546, -0.021626852452754974, 0.06626244634389877, -0.03442389890551567, 0.140289306640625, 0.013800772838294506, -0.012093485333025455, -0.08512642979621887, -0.057227760553359985, -0.03658474236726761, -0.04049201309680939, -0.09750321507453918, 0.0929008349776268 ]

{ "pdf_file": "KOIY3K7K4LNEPAQQ2YXCAW2KS4TYUSBR.pdf", "text": "For week ending: April 27, 2013\nFor data reported through: May 1, 2013Quota Period: FY 2012\nQuota Period Dates: 05/01/12 to 04/30/13\n18,711,284 23,920 325,710 19,060,914 31,609,884 60\n _________________________________________________________________________________ _ National \n Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNotice: Effective September 1, 2012 the skate wing possession limit has increased to 4,100 lb of skate wings (9,307 \nlb whole weight). This possession limit increase is only applicable for those fishing on a NE multispecies, scallop, or monkfish Day-At-Sea (DAS). This possession limit will remain in effect until April 30, 2013 or until 85% of the skate wing quota is harvested. Vessels fishing on a NE multispecies category B DAS may only possess 220 lb of skate wings (500 lb whole weight) and non-DAS vessels may possess the incidental trip limit of 500 lb of skate win\ngs (1,135 lb whole wei ght).\nThese data are the best available to NOAA Fisheries Service when this report was \ncompiled. Data are supplied to NOAA Fisheries Service by dealers via Dealer Electronic Reporting to the Standard Atlantic Fisheries Information System (SAFIS) and/or by state agencies and may be preliminary. Discrepancies with data from previous Weekly Landings Reports are due to corrections made to the database.Northeast Skate Complex \nWing Fishery Weekly Report\nPreviously\nReported\nLandings\n(Whole \nPounds)Previous\nWeeks'\nUpdates\n(Whole \nPounds)Current\nWeek's\nLandings\n(Whole \nPounds)Cumulative\nLandings\n(Whole \nPounds)Quota\n(Whole \nPounds)Percent\nof\nQuota\n(%)\n05,000,00010,000,00015,000,00020,000,00025,000,00030,000,000\n5/1/2012 7/1/2012 9/1/2012 11/1/2012 1/1/2013 3/1/2013Cumulative Landings (Pounds)\nDate\n85% Quota\nQuota\nPrior Year's Landings (whole wt. in pounds)\nQuota Rationing Trajectory\nCurrent Year's Landings (whole wt. in pounds)" }

[ -0.020436810329556465, -0.01658814400434494, -0.07598908245563507, 0.019218508154153824, 0.04970407485961914, 0.020533975213766098, 0.030029017478227615, -0.057166025042533875, 0.04730609804391861, 0.08902761340141296, 0.00888015702366829, 0.05802580714225769, 0.0411970280110836, -0.019696561619639397, 0.022774914279580116, -0.035769276320934296, -0.003994912374764681, 0.014749214984476566, -0.0693797767162323, 0.0857565626502037, -0.040917351841926575, 0.09319613873958588, 0.01132080890238285, 0.010149105452001095, 0.04941146820783615, -0.027363693341612816, -0.030047707259655, 0.019658122211694717, -0.04671195149421692, -0.005154321435838938, 0.10536125302314758, -0.0581575408577919, 0.03208471089601517, 0.0944693461060524, -0.006322379689663649, 0.014100891537964344, 0.1441924273967743, -0.007161409128457308, 0.0017079588724300265, 0.01983894594013691, -0.06208707392215729, 0.11511048674583435, 0.03898663446307182, 0.06483973562717438, -0.09183439612388611, -0.008740642108023167, -0.024632081389427185, 0.003023409517481923, 0.034384410828351974, -0.031729139387607574, -0.014075272716581821, -0.03050234168767929, -0.024689147248864174, 0.07325378805398941, -0.027454882860183716, 0.014996773563325405, -0.0018786274595186114, -0.005572930444031954, -0.015812771394848824, 0.03182610124349594, -0.058538008481264114, -0.005390055477619171, 0.02541445754468441, -0.030380979180336, -0.0292508527636528, -0.020832713693380356, 0.02030201070010662, -0.08502757549285889, 0.13266628980636597, 0.00707060843706131, 0.12193960696458817, 0.038437698036432266, 0.04387599974870682, -0.004547500517219305, -0.0379614382982254, -0.03705417364835739, 0.09564319252967834, 0.0709991306066513, 0.10789274424314499, -0.017451204359531403, 0.01705154962837696, -0.019485311582684517, 0.02294662594795227, 0.0020293574780225754, -0.04031418636441231, -0.00784161128103733, -0.0741417333483696, 0.025135330855846405, 0.031079916283488274, 0.05336891487240791, -0.0032557849772274494, 0.07018684595823288, 0.03275785595178604, -0.04419967904686928, -0.03242155909538269, -0.02966897375881672, 0.012259328737854958, 0.04164827987551689, -0.05281591787934303, 0.03709449991583824, -0.046600092202425, 0.004921194165945053, 0.05387786775827408, -0.023871440440416336, 0.047465164214372635, 0.0076843868009746075, 0.029430290684103966, 0.06789769232273102, -0.12741310894489288, 0.0026302600745111704, 0.030734367668628693, 0.05179794877767563, -0.03881308436393738, 0.049355506896972656, 0.024222927168011665, 0.023297352716326714, 0.03545580059289932, -0.025979695841670036, -0.02492769993841648, 0.007800244260579348, 0.03111356869339943, 0.05974145978689194, -0.06339108198881149, 0.0018455691169947386, -0.05571742355823517, -0.06446824967861176, -0.029379049316048622, -9.754532221386624e-34, -0.026460526511073112, 0.0527387373149395, -0.047221556305885315, -0.011739649809896946, 0.03971964120864868, -0.020083513110876083, -0.040732115507125854, 0.05168546736240387, 0.10651307553052902, 0.023052671924233437, 0.02789505198597908, -0.020231973379850388, 0.04120396822690964, 0.04192300885915756, -0.04692409932613373, 0.00790928304195404, -0.033746808767318726, 0.00038568011950701475, -0.07901515811681747, -0.02827274240553379, -0.008883975446224213, -0.04067621007561684, -0.020194759592413902, 0.040251705795526505, 0.05044294148683548, 0.05219992995262146, 0.053296156227588654, 0.05327591672539711, -0.006369000766426325, -0.00432027131319046, -0.04073591157793999, 0.024113377556204796, 0.03753463923931122, 0.002457949798554182, 0.037922266870737076, -0.015242241322994232, 0.01904068887233734, 0.01824486255645752, -0.03401900827884674, -0.01662944070994854, 0.05738454312086105, 0.08395550400018692, -0.016558362171053886, 0.048374198377132416, 0.04054320231080055, 0.027509519830346107, 0.00040595672908239067, 0.017863109707832336, 0.04044864699244499, 0.0015117113944143057, -0.008770928718149662, -0.0040799579583108425, 0.015283938497304916, 0.003272430505603552, -0.08301161229610443, -0.007840823382139206, -0.06469614058732986, -0.004052689298987389, 0.058269478380680084, -0.009627282619476318, 0.015682579949498177, 0.05968164652585983, -0.017858918756246567, 0.11653394997119904, -0.09111060947179794, -0.18443326652050018, -0.04501009359955788, -0.04775850847363472, 0.04322704300284386, -0.01781468652188778, -0.003146514995023608, 0.038726311177015305, 0.06453843414783478, -0.056301940232515335, -0.14530906081199646, -0.013941690325737, 0.018416771665215492, -0.02889714017510414, 0.029394663870334625, 0.013437663204967976, -0.020991722121834755, -0.005685018375515938, 0.06178215891122818, 0.06210640072822571, -0.011464233510196209, 0.01876908540725708, 0.030110333114862442, 0.003595021553337574, -0.09152314811944962, 0.05738971382379532, 0.001013450208120048, 0.026317080482840538, 0.01816306635737419, -0.012676483020186424, -0.03634076565504074, -1.8414730630035546e-33, -0.009414647705852985, -0.06539060175418854, -0.012407132424414158, -0.02374851331114769, 0.010873030871152878, -0.02742193453013897, -0.07168179005384445, -0.07037848979234695, 0.043340522795915604, -0.06266407668590546, 0.00025742509751580656, 0.005182766821235418, 0.03448384627699852, 0.05871589481830597, 0.010577354580163956, -0.028234530240297318, 0.05379614606499672, -0.025743288919329643, -0.11741973459720612, 0.0216789860278368, -0.004179626703262329, 0.07874371111392975, 0.014600217342376709, -0.016954295337200165, 0.019392678514122963, -0.07649638503789902, 0.12849688529968262, 0.04045838490128517, -0.029503239318728447, 0.011937985196709633, 0.051487985998392105, -0.01639014109969139, 0.01573874242603779, 0.04242825508117676, -0.008134566247463226, 0.032629843801259995, 0.020918693393468857, -0.016320329159498215, -0.0693516656756401, -0.047428522258996964, 0.1583361029624939, 0.02130870521068573, -0.06603085994720459, 0.014742236584424973, 0.009961779229342937, 0.025804724544286728, 0.05135241150856018, 0.01650291495025158, -0.03258964419364929, -0.0006968149682506919, -0.1342017948627472, -0.12054543197154999, -0.06461461633443832, 0.024058211594820023, 0.0006235226755961776, -0.021788407117128372, -0.04188092052936554, -0.10942091792821884, 0.06007901579141617, -0.022257748991250992, -0.0022568986751139164, 0.06434081494808197, 0.029269155114889145, 0.006640251260250807, 0.006478216499090195, -0.11479466408491135, -0.052064843475818634, -0.07092180103063583, 0.015433530323207378, 0.08097738027572632, 0.06722409278154373, -0.026846326887607574, -0.04674289748072624, 0.013885759748518467, -0.07679209858179092, 0.10376419126987457, 0.00006649483111687005, -0.017256051301956177, -0.13585242629051208, -0.045708067715168, 0.015812121331691742, -0.05129845440387726, -0.10395929962396622, 0.021614301949739456, 0.05845052748918533, 0.06797115504741669, 0.05005187541246414, 0.04027632623910904, 0.014522286131978035, 0.046255066990852356, -0.056467656046152115, -0.12409864366054535, 0.05561710149049759, -0.055570848286151886, -0.14133481681346893, -4.930851460471786e-8, -0.020715072751045227, 0.029966523870825768, -0.08935432136058807, -0.014930808916687965, -0.07866048067808151, 0.037689898163080215, -0.001999282045289874, -0.02680833265185356, -0.004309375304728746, 0.11704015731811523, 0.04555374011397362, 0.018402116373181343, -0.03982783481478691, -0.010966364294290543, 0.007340763229876757, -0.023932956159114838, -0.04497699439525604, 0.008193324320018291, -0.057549379765987396, -0.04734080284833908, -0.07063644379377365, -0.014322078786790371, 0.00023744151985738426, 0.06236540526151657, 0.07713047415018082, 0.02468438632786274, -0.07038499414920807, 0.04536188021302223, -0.04096119478344917, -0.01150059886276722, -0.1024317666888237, 0.0427665151655674, -0.026583125814795494, -0.014631910249590874, 0.032319799065589905, -0.016968969255685806, 0.061698611825704575, -0.008271305821835995, -0.0010853225830942392, 0.005643639247864485, 0.03926079347729683, -0.05863587185740471, -0.05931505560874939, -0.01247891504317522, -0.03912893310189247, -0.048392679542303085, 0.014893177896738052, -0.01891404204070568, 0.060254327952861786, 0.020403368398547173, -0.018932707607746124, -0.010229662992060184, -0.0912473127245903, -0.005537830758839846, 0.008559005334973335, 0.00594258913770318, -0.015452045947313309, -0.06665682047605515, 0.019284706562757492, -0.0629008486866951, 0.042809825390577316, -0.04164829105138779, -0.08924883604049683, -0.037148285657167435 ]

{ "pdf_file": "TQKGJWYKJNTQWNW2HK7HS4AB3RHIFAYW.pdf", "text": "UCSC Grad and Shooting Victim Honored\nGabriel Zimmerman is the first staffer to be murdered while in the line of duty; the legislation \n \npassed the House with a unanimous vote\n \n \n \nWashington , DC – Congressman Sam Farr (D-Carmel) today voted in support H.Res. 364,\nlegislation that will name a meeting room in the U.S. Capitol in honor of Gabriel Zimmerman, a\nUC Santa Cruz graduate and staff member of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords who was\nkilled in the January 8th shooting in Tucson, Arizona. H.Res. 364 designates\nroom HVC 215 of the Capitol Visitor Center as the “Gabriel Zimmerman Meeting Room”.  \n \n \n \n“The ‘Gabriel Zimmerman Meeting Room’ will honor the legacy of Gabriel Zimmerman and the\nthousands of congressional staffer that work in our communities across the country,” said\nCongressman Sam Farr\n. “By all accounts Gabe was a person dedicated to making a difference in the lives of the people\naround him, and now that spirit will be echoed by the people who visit this room and the staffer\nthat use it everyday.” \n \n \n \nZimmerman graduated from UC Santa Cruz in 2002, where a Scholarship Fund has also been\nestablished in his honor to celebrate his dedication to public service. Gabriel Zimmerman is the\nfirst Congressional staff member to be murdered while in the line of duty. \n \n \n 1 / 2 UCSC Grad and Shooting Victim Honored\n \nCongressman Farr is cosponsor of the bipartisan legislation, H. Res. 364. \n \n \n \n##\n \n 2 / 2" }

[ -0.00038920267252251506, -0.016623130068182945, 0.007952925749123096, 0.059247273951768875, 0.06572019308805466, 0.053673695772886276, 0.0054386998526751995, 0.03679156303405762, -0.08892498165369034, 0.020179271697998047, 0.01068209856748581, -0.06313633173704147, 0.04160917177796364, -0.0368473194539547, -0.004253334365785122, 0.03978615254163742, 0.05109735578298569, 0.011939529329538345, -0.029875556007027626, -0.021101607009768486, -0.005723802372813225, 0.021834369748830795, 0.09524651616811752, -0.05778626725077629, -0.05694541335105896, 0.05225612595677376, -0.04904385283589363, 0.003275540191680193, -0.06163356080651283, -0.025899028405547142, 0.004602034110575914, -0.008639931678771973, 0.02576269954442978, 0.010935568250715733, 0.1120700016617775, 0.04999342933297157, 0.022923050448298454, 0.0015731097664684057, 0.0417134054005146, -0.0020385857205837965, -0.09370087832212448, -0.09169776737689972, 0.011622253805398941, -0.0818420946598053, -0.07650262117385864, 0.009364183060824871, -0.03963801637291908, -0.08680630475282669, 0.039244793355464935, -0.03191111981868744, 0.02273891493678093, -0.027734659612178802, 0.00901124905794859, 0.019059214740991592, 0.04252708703279495, -0.008572813123464584, 0.044741250574588776, -0.07932906597852707, 0.01734425127506256, 0.06176825612783432, -0.059659793972969055, -0.05970827117562294, -0.039129193872213364, 0.049354277551174164, 0.055728666484355927, 0.016359619796276093, -0.04630269110202789, 0.03690050169825554, 0.01205368246883154, -0.10715731978416443, 0.025413881987333298, -0.020437920466065407, -0.009559927508234978, -0.10636675357818604, -0.05958324670791626, 0.04807855561375618, 0.0448341928422451, 0.09427030384540558, 0.09226906299591064, -0.11430501937866211, 0.06972626596689224, -0.00939219444990158, 0.021226994693279266, -0.012911060824990273, 0.013967241160571575, 0.06990508735179901, -0.02052326314151287, -0.0803229808807373, 0.008736980147659779, 0.09873415529727936, 0.06146903336048126, -0.014330734498798847, 0.10815215855836868, 0.01766785979270935, -0.040200378745794296, 0.07480532675981522, -0.03511294722557068, -0.05684187635779381, -0.05983627587556839, 0.014352524653077126, 0.05696601793169975, -0.03357398882508278, -0.04402099549770355, -0.031488001346588135, -0.04471743479371071, -0.046514127403497696, -0.002807131502777338, 0.03952326253056526, 0.014944539405405521, 0.04058399051427841, 0.053587187081575394, 0.026591990143060684, -0.06026759743690491, -0.05008522793650627, -0.04373208060860634, 0.026110423728823662, -0.016999511048197746, -0.042352382093667984, 0.08461321145296097, -0.004515498410910368, 0.08362745493650436, 0.010200277902185917, 0.02055014856159687, -0.010018240660429, 0.03856373578310013, -0.0756734162569046, -0.03784948214888573, -8.71632459048084e-34, -0.05309589207172394, 0.028688322752714157, 0.0023758395109325647, -0.053025271743535995, -0.035790231078863144, -0.01068455632776022, -0.01029285229742527, -0.06283308565616608, -0.023160289973020554, -0.012818803079426289, -0.04153469577431679, 0.0699920654296875, 0.04104617238044739, 0.018600931391119957, -0.053226325660943985, -0.12548668682575226, -0.0447135828435421, 0.12315652519464493, 0.01385323517024517, -0.009477650746703148, 0.045228831470012665, -0.04880411550402641, 0.09034580737352371, 0.05222627520561218, 0.14277400076389313, -0.013284553773701191, 0.005508049391210079, -0.020020650699734688, -0.02212708629667759, 0.03582969680428505, -0.028122268617153168, 0.03834903985261917, 0.0396374836564064, -0.04193177819252014, 0.02504669316112995, -0.013608564622700214, -0.026608245447278023, -0.051024239510297775, -0.08029768615961075, -0.0032606597524136305, -0.007494484074413776, 0.05299350619316101, 0.038075949996709824, 0.03249423950910568, -0.007444994989782572, -0.041790202260017395, 0.0535726435482502, 0.013316672295331955, 0.02798677235841751, -0.0188264399766922, -0.10299976170063019, 0.007150450721383095, -0.053406357765197754, -0.05984120815992355, 0.008334118872880936, -0.07333396375179291, 0.06701065599918365, -0.04101592302322388, 0.02330617792904377, -0.045157335698604584, -0.04777255654335022, 0.10047127306461334, -0.06327759474515915, -0.0684044137597084, -0.030975040048360825, 0.00039980659494176507, -0.1269238293170929, 0.037954118102788925, 0.027503283694386482, 0.02371848374605179, -0.03128023073077202, -0.06497696042060852, 0.07908006012439728, 0.037099238485097885, 0.007752879057079554, -0.0000410494722018484, 0.01974867843091488, 0.028340250253677368, 0.0055933305993676186, -0.043877970427274704, -0.04537506401538849, -0.01404431089758873, 0.07730965316295624, 0.04131455346941948, 0.03828590735793114, -0.024627622216939926, -0.0012338643427938223, -0.015386074781417847, -0.00875571183860302, 0.0220051072537899, 0.007489069364964962, -0.06733816117048264, 0.0704864114522934, 0.07214247435331345, -0.02698545716702938, -3.4622283271990085e-33, -0.021699607372283936, 0.07337875664234161, -0.009565262123942375, -0.04617129638791084, 0.029097087681293488, -0.019098330289125443, -0.06770774722099304, -0.043059561401605606, 0.02535313181579113, -0.009660199284553528, -0.008506023325026035, 0.012130748480558395, -0.010310624726116657, -0.026217518374323845, 0.021453814581036568, -0.012697100639343262, 0.0338733047246933, -0.0017750805709511042, -0.03170216083526611, -0.06380797922611237, 0.014392256736755371, 0.06501350551843643, -0.007681348826736212, 0.09355644881725311, -0.05694302171468735, 0.07786829024553299, 0.007861216552555561, -0.0651376023888588, 0.03740212321281433, 0.038570716977119446, -0.08487077057361603, -0.07360044121742249, -0.07523739337921143, 0.12373003363609314, -0.024170951917767525, -0.11085179448127747, 0.08967360854148865, -0.05034279450774193, -0.0447542741894722, 0.026140930131077766, 0.08648543804883957, 0.06834230571985245, 0.004981582053005695, 0.04977003112435341, -0.0716114342212677, -0.06795016676187515, -0.019322434440255165, -0.012051722034811974, 0.001705313683487475, -0.04671313613653183, 0.00399164529517293, -0.0724233090877533, -0.10990125685930252, -0.001537362695671618, -0.06280148029327393, 0.005064425524324179, 0.08855648338794708, 0.04242194816470146, -0.026291899383068085, -0.04541265591979027, 0.03554962947964668, 0.05176781490445137, 0.02927268110215664, -0.010621396824717522, 0.008953381329774857, -0.005002322606742382, -0.03162599354982376, -0.016270853579044342, -0.0046491436660289764, -0.011652173474431038, 0.007420480716973543, -0.08114003390073776, -0.02732951194047928, -0.05558070167899132, 0.018252553418278694, 0.034649088978767395, -0.0337013341486454, -0.05361500009894371, -0.042347926646471024, 0.08005020022392273, -0.0045881448313593864, 0.04383454471826553, -0.1136685386300087, -0.018503952771425247, 0.04346660524606705, -0.03177117928862572, 0.012787546031177044, -0.07474502176046371, 0.013922317884862423, 0.04453255608677864, -0.1065949946641922, -0.04662149399518967, -0.01793442666530609, 0.06745609641075134, 0.02374212257564068, -5.8055221074937435e-8, 0.07433793693780899, 0.010235975496470928, -0.011135592125356197, -0.01632319949567318, 0.07159490138292313, -0.08835186809301376, -0.022519946098327637, -0.03477713465690613, -0.00228599994443357, 0.017187418416142464, 0.10355009138584137, 0.08327431231737137, -0.029154235497117043, -0.06437607854604721, -0.050754114985466, -0.027099734172225, -0.0735817477107048, 0.05319768190383911, -0.07531485706567764, -0.0477667897939682, -0.02781570516526699, -0.043163228780031204, -0.09264020621776581, 0.04113113507628441, -0.02621067501604557, 0.03087761625647545, -0.03524957597255707, 0.010976066812872887, 0.0627375990152359, 0.056359268724918365, -0.03107653185725212, 0.02090759016573429, -0.04140055924654007, -0.0638926774263382, 0.022560661658644676, 0.031023429706692696, 0.019177453592419624, -0.06043954938650131, 0.007843602448701859, 0.11513378471136093, -0.06119241937994957, -0.026174306869506836, 0.052356574684381485, 0.09266342967748642, -0.04241247475147247, 0.006855151616036892, -0.10659938305616379, -0.036513134837150574, 0.0376913882791996, -0.03805053234100342, 0.02764146402478218, -0.09146683663129807, -0.047608066350221634, 0.06452581286430359, 0.0035759296733886003, 0.05916694551706314, -0.009508910588920116, -0.019028276205062866, -0.011197005398571491, -0.03783351927995682, 0.06654419004917145, -0.09053917974233627, 0.04223445802927017, 0.04742448404431343 ]

{ "pdf_file": "2Z5VOQ6G6CMR5GMVSAAXULXHXTMJPTM2.pdf", "text": "Department of Energy\nFY 2007 Congressional \nBudget Request\nFebruary 2006\nOffice of Chief Financial OfficerVolume 2DOE/CF-003\nVolume 2\nOther defense activities\nSecurity & Safety Performance assurance\nEnvironment, safety & health\nLegacy management\nNuclear energy\nDefense related administrative support\nHearings and appeals\nSafeguards & security crosscut\n Department of Energy\nFY 2007 Congressional \nBudget Request\nFebruary 2006\nOffice of Chief Financial OfficerVolume 2DOE/CF-003\nVolume 2\nPrinted with soy ink on recycled paperOther defense activities\nSecurity & Safety Performance assurance\nEnvironment, safety & health\nLegacy management\nNuclear energy\nDefense related administrative support\nHearings and appeals\nSafeguards & security crosscut Other Defense Activities\nSafeguards and Security Crosscut Other Defense Activities\nSafeguards and Security Crosscut Department of Energy/ \nOther Defense Activities FY 200 7 Congressional Budget Volume 2 \nTable of Contents \nPage\nAppropriation Account Summary.................................................................................................. ..............3\nOther Defense Activities....................................................................................................... .......................7\nSafeguards and Security Crosscut............................................................................................... .............159\nThe Department of Energy’s FY 2007 Congressional Budget justification is available on the Office of\nChief Financial Officer/CFO homepage at http://www.mbe.doe.gov/budget/\nPage 1 Page 2 Department of Energy\nAppropriation Account Summary\n(dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nCurrent Current Congressional\nApprop. Approp. Request $ %\nDiscretionary Summary By Appropriation\nEnergy And Water Development, And Related Agencies\nAppropriation Summary:\nEnergy Programs\nEnergy supply and Conservation...................................... 1,801,815 1,812,627 1,923,361 +110,734 +6.1%\nFossil energy programs\nClean coal technology.................................................... -160,000 -20,000 —— +20,000 +100.0%\nFossil energy research and development...................... 560,852 592,014 469,686 -122,328 -20.7%Naval petroleum and oil shale reserves......................... 17,750 21,285 18,810 -2,475 -11.6%\nElk Hills school lands fund............................................. 36,000 84,000 —— -84,000 -100.0%\nStrategic petroleum reserve........................................... 126,710 207,340 155,430 -51,910 -25.0%\nNortheast home heating oil reserve............................... 4,930 —— 4,950 +4,950 N/A\nStrategic petroleum account.......................................... 43,000 -43,000 —— +43,000 +100.0%\nTotal, Fossil energy programs........................................... 629,242 841,639 648,876 -192,763 -22.9%\nUranium enrichment D&D fund......................................... 495,015 556,606 579,368 +22,762 +4.1%\nEnergy information administration..................................... 83,819 85,314 89,769 +4,455 +5.2%\nNon-Defense environmental cleanup................................ 439,601 349,687 310,358 -39,329 -11.2%\nScience.............................................................................. 3,635,650 3,596,391 4,101,710 +505,319 +14. 1%\nNuclear waste disposal..................................................... 343,232 148,500 156,420 +7,920 +5.3%\nDepartmental administration............................................. 128,598 128,519 128,825 +306 +0.2%\nInspector general............................................................... 41,176 41,580 45,507 +3,927 +9.4%\nTotal, Energy Programs....................................................... 7,598,148 7,560,863 7,984,194 +423,331 +5.6%\nAtomic Energy Defense Activities\nNational nuclear security administration:\nWeapons activities......................................................... 6,625,542 6,369,597 6,407,889 +38,292 +0.6%\nDefense nuclear nonproliferation................................... 1,507,966 1,614,839 1,726,213 +111,374 +6.9%Naval reactors................................................................ 801,437 781,605 795,133 +13,528 +1.7%Office of the administrator.............................................. 363,350 338,450 386,576 +48,126 +14.2%\nTotal, National nuclear security administration................. 9,298,295 9,104,491 9,315,811 +211,320 +2.3%\nEnvironmental and other defense activities:\nDefense environmental cleanup..................................... 6,800,848 6,130,447 5,390,312 -740,135 -12.1%\nOther defense activities.................................................. 687,149 635,578 717,788 +82,210 +12.9%Defense nuclear waste disposal.................................... 229,152 346,500 388,080 +41,580 +12.0%\nTotal, Environmental & other defense activities................ 7,717,149 7,112,525 6,496,180 -616,345 -8.7%\nTotal, Atomic Energy Defense Activities.............................. 17,015,444 16,217,016 15,811,991 -405,025 -2.5%\nPower marketing administrations:\nSoutheastern power administration................................... 5,158 5,544 5,723 +179 +3.2%\nSouthwestern power administration.................................. 29,117 29,864 31,539 +1,675 +5.6%Western area power administration.................................. 171,715 231,652 212,213 -19,439 -8.4%Falcon & Amistad operating & maintenance fund............. 2,804 2,665 2,500 -165 -6.2%Colorado River Basins...................................................... —— -23,000 -23,000 —— ——\nTotal, Power marketing administrations............................... 208,794 246,725 228,975 -17,750 -7.2%\nFederal energy regulatory commission................................ —— —— —— —— ——\nSubtotal, Energy And Water Development and Related\nAgencies.................................................................................. 24,822,386 24,024,604 24,025,160 +556 +0.0%\nUranium enrichment D&D fund discretionary payments...... -459,296 -446,490 -452,000 -5,510 -1.2%\nExcess fees and recoveries, FERC..................................... -18,452 -15,542 -16,405 -863 -5.6%\nTotal, Discretionary Funding.................................................\n. 24,344,638 23,562,572 23,556,755 -5,817 -0.0%FY 2007 vs. FY 2006\nAppropriation Account Summary FY 2007 Congressional Budget Request Page 3 Page 4 Other Defense \nActivities\nPage 5 Other Defense \nActivities\nPage 6 Department of Energy/ \nOther Defense Activities FY 200 7 Congressional Budget Table of Contents \nPage\nAppropriation Language ......................................................................................................... ................... 9\nAppropriation Summary by Program............................................................................................... ..........11\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance ...................................................................................... .......13\nEnvironment, Safety and Health................................................................................................. ...............63\nLegacy Management.............................................................................................................. ....................97\nNuclear Energy ................................................................................................................. .......................121\nDefense Related Administrative Support......................................................................................... ........147\nHearings and Appeals ........................................................................................................... ...................149\nPage 7 Page 8 Other Defense Activities/ FY 2007 Congressional Budget\nAppropriation Language Other Defense Activities \nAppropriation Language\nFor Department of Energy expenses, including the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and \ncapital equipment and other expenses, necessary for atomic energy defense, other defense activities, and classified activities, in carrying out the purposes of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 \nU.S.C. 7101 et seq.), including the acquisition or condemnation of any real property or any facility or for \nplant or facility acquisition, construction, or expansion, and the purchase of not to exceed ten passenger motor vehicles for replacement only, [including not to exceed two buses; $641,998,000] $717,788,000 ,\nto remain available until expended. (Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006.) \nExplanation of Change \nChanges reflect revisions to funding amounts and fiscal year references.\nPage 9 Page 10 Department of Energy\nAppropriation Summary by Program\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nCurrent Current Congressional\nApprop. Approp. Request $ %FY 2007 vs. FY 2006\nOther Defense Activitie s\nOffice of security........................................................................ 296,118 —— —— —— ——\nSecurity and safety performance assurance............................. —— 304,024 298,497 -5,527 -1.8%\nIndependent oversight and performance assurance................ 24,472 —— —— —— ——\nEnvironment, safety and health................................................. 128,603 76,259 80,814 +4,555 +6.0%Office of Legacy Management................................................... 46,520 44,625 167,851 +123,226 +276.1%Nuclear energy........................................................................... 113,456 122,664 75,949 -46,715 -38.1%Defense related administrative support..................................... 91,700 86,699 93,258 +6,559 +7.6%\nOffice of hearings and appeals.................................................. 4,283 4,310 4,422 +112 +2.6%\nSubtotal, Other defense activities................................................. 705,152 638,581 720,791 +82,210 +12.9%\nUse of prior year balances and other adjustments.................... -18,003 -3,003 -3,003 —— ——\nTotal, Other Defense Activities................................................\n. 687,149 635,578 717,788 +82,210 +12.9 %\nPage 11 Page 12 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetOther Defense Activities\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance\nOverview\nAppropriation Summary by Program\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005\nCurrent\nAppropriationFY 2006 \nOriginal\nAppropriationFY 2006 \nAdjustmentsaFY 2006 \nCurrent\nAppropriationFY 2007 \nRequest\nOther Defense Activities\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance........................................... 320,590\nb307,095 -3,071 304,024 298,497\nTotal, Other Def ense Activities ................. 320,590b307,095 -3,071 304,024 298,497\nPreface\nThe Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance (SSA) is responsible for the development, \npromulgation, and evaluation of security programs, and the independent oversight of security; cyber \nsecurity; emergency management; and environment, safety, and health programs throughout the \nDepartment. SSA develops and assists in the implementation of strategies, policies, and technology pertaining to the protection of national security and other critical assets entrusted to the Department; and provides information and analysis regarding the effectiveness, vulnerabilities, and trends of the \nDepartment’s security, safety, and other programs and functions of interest to departmental senior \nmanagement and other stakeholders. SSA also provides administrative support to the Office of the Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.\nWithin the Other Defense Activities appropriation, the SSA program has three subprograms: Nuclear \nSafeguards and Security (NSS), Security Investigations (SI), and Program Direction. Within NSS are 3 key activities: Operational Support; Technology Development and Systems Deployment; and \nClassification, Declassification, and Controlled Information. Within SI are 3 key activities: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Office of Personnel Management, and Related Security Investigations \nActivities.\nThis Overview will describe Strategic Context, Mission, and Benefits. These items together put the \nappropriation in perspective. The Annual Performance Results and Targets, Means and Strategies, and \nValidation and Verification sections address how the goals will be achieved and how performance will \nbe measured. Finally, this Overview will address Significant Program Shifts.\na Reflects a 1% rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes \nin the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006.\nb FY 2005 funding includes $14,608,000 for the support of the DOE Emergency Operations Center. Funding was transferred \nto the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\nPage 13 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetStrategic Context\nFollowing publication of the Administration’s National Energy Policy, the Department developed a \nStrategic Plan that defines its mission, four strategic goals for accomplishing that mission, and seven \ngeneral goals to support the strategic goals. As stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s \nStrategic and General Goals will be accomplished not only through the efforts of the major program \noffices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission. SSA performs critical functions, which directly support the mission of the Department.\nThese functions include developing and promulgating security policies, training, and technology \nthroughout DOE; assisting the United States and other governments track the use and movement of\nnuclear material; and providing information to the Secretary and other DOE managers regarding the status and effectiveness of the Department’s security and safety program implementation.\nMission\nSSA provides for the development, promulgation, and evaluation of security programs, and the \nindependent oversight of security; cyber security; emergency management; and environment, safety, and \nhealth programs throughout the Department; and provides security-related services to DOE \nHeadquarters. SSA also provides administrative support to the Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.\nAs stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission. SSA performs critical functions that directly support the mission of the Department. These functions include:\n/squarecentdeveloping and promulgating clear and consistent security strategies and policies governing the \nprotection of national security and other critical assets entrusted to the Department;\n/squarecentdeveloping and providing standardized, comprehensive security, and safety training throughout the Department;\n/squarecentmanaging the Department’s protective force for DOE facilities in the National Capital Area, \nincluding DOE’s Continuity of Government facilities and plans;\n/squarecentproviding executive protective services for the Department;\n/squarecentmanaging the development and deployment of security technologies;\n/squarecentdeveloping and implementing Department-wide nuclear and radiological materials tracking and accounting programs;\n/squarecentassisting other governmental and departmental organizations in the mission of accounting for and assuring the security of nuclear material throughout the world;\n/squarecentmanaging the Department’s security investigations budget and personnel security programs associated with providing access authorizations to DOE Federal and contract personnel;\n/squarecentmanaging the U.S. Government-wide program to classify and declassify nuclear weapons-relatedtechnology and implementing the requirements of Executive Order 12958 regarding the \nclassification and declassification of information that is vital to national security;\nPage 14 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional Budget/squarecent\nassisting Departmental and other U.S. Governmental organizations in providing adequate protection \nto national security assets;\n/squarecentproviding specialized security support services to the Department associated with the development and dissemination of security awareness information; maintenance of various security-related data \nbase systems; management of the foreign ownership, control, or influence and foreign visits, \nassignments, and travel programs; and conduct of vulnerability assessments in support of the implementation of the Design Basis Threat Policy;\n/squarecentconducting performance appraisals to verify that the Department’s security interests are protected; \nthe Department can effectively respond to emergencies; and site workers, the public, and the \nenvironment are protected from hazardous operations and materials; and,\n/squarecentproviding support for centralized leadership in resolving Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board issues.\nBenefits\nDOE must implement effective security programs in an increasingly challenging threat environment.\nThe primary focus of SSA is on effectively and efficiently implementing protection programs that fully respond to the evolving Design Basis Threat Policy by addressing programmatic and technical \nuncertainties and establishing cooperation and useful dialog between managers and security \nprofessionals at all levels. Towards this end, and in support of the unprecedented security initiatives \nannounced by the Secretary in May 2004, SSA is: 1) streamlining existing security policies to remove ambiguity in roles, responsibilities, and requirements; eliminate conflicts; and incorporate recent updates; 2) emphasizing the deployment of innovative security technology to transition from manpower\nintensive to engineered systems that provide greater security at reduced lifecycle costs; 3) advancing the\nprofessional development of DOE security and safety personnel to ensure that their training is \nresponsive to the needs of the DOE community; 4) increasing the capabilities and responsiveness of the protective force; and 5) improving the defensive posture of DOE.\nSSA also identifies and reports to senior DOE managers on site-specific and Department-wide issues \nregarding security, cyber security, emergency management, environment, safety, and health, classification and declassification programs and other programs using an efficient, systematic independent oversight process that emphasizes performance and performance testing; conducts follow-\nup activities to determine the effectiveness of corrective actions; and promotes line management self-\nassessment activities, thereby enhancing overall performance in these program areas. In addition, SSA provides cross-organizational support to DOE efforts to resolve Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board-related technical and management issues necessary to ensure public health and safety.\nMajor FY 2005 Achievements\n/square4Design Basis Threat Site Assistance Visits – In partnership with the National Nuclear Security \nAdministration and Energy, Science, and Environment program and field locations; and Headquarters \npolicy organizations, SSA successfully completed site assistance visits at 11 DOE field sites with the purpose of developing resource-efficient, sustainable protection strategies and assist in the development of realistic budget submissions to support timely implementation of the revised Design Basis Threat\nPolicy.\nPage 15 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional Budget/square4Streamlining DOE Safeguards and Security Directives – SSA has combined 27 safeguards and \nsecurity directives and several hundred guidance memoranda into an umbrella Order, 6 subject matter\nmanuals, and a reference manual. The documents have been presented to the Deputy Secretary for \nreview and approval. Streamlining this information will make it easier for users of the information to \nbetter understand as well as to find a specific safeguard or security topics of interest; and will assure that \nany changes are consistently coordinated with other policies.\nPage 16 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetAnnual Performance Results and Targetsa\nFY 2002 Results FY 2003 Results FY 2004 Results FY 2005 Results FY 2006 Targets FY 2007 Targets\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance / Nuclear Safeguards and Security / Operational Support\nNA NA NA NA Reduce the average time it takes \nto process access authorization \nrequests after receipt of the \nbackground investigation by 10% \n(3.2 business hours) over the FY \n2004 processing time of 32 \nbusiness hours. (Efficiency \nMeasure)Reduce the average time it takes \nto process access authorization \nrequests after receipt of the \nbackground investigation by 11% \n(3.5 business hours) over the FY \n2004 processing time of 32\nbusiness hours. (Efficiency \nMeasure)\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance / Nuclear Safeguards and Security / Technology Deployment\nNA NA NA NA NA Develop and deliver for \ndeployment 2 technology -based\nsecurity systems that have the \nsupport of Departmental \norganizations and will assist in \nimplementing the Design Basis Threat Policy. (Annual Output)\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance / Program Direction\nNA NA NA NA Complete non traditional, lower \nresource impact oversight \nactivities at 10% (2) additional \nlower priority DOE sites than \nconducted in FY 2004 (13), while \nretaining the critical \ncomprehensive inspections and \nappraisals at high priority DOE \nsites. (Efficiency Measure)NA\na Annual effectiveness and efficiency performance targets will not be reported in the Department’s annual Performance and Accoun tability report (PAR).\nPage 17 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetMeans and Strategies\nSSA will achieve its mission by issuing clear, concise security policies, providing cutting-edge\ntechnology-based security solutions, providing world-class training programs for security and safety \nprofessionals, and applying rigorous independent oversight to departmental operations.\nThe SSA vision is to provide a sound foundation for protecting the Nation’s nuclear and energy assets \nthrough advanced technology deployment and professional development. This vision captures the SSA \nrole within the Department's overall security (including nuclear safeguards and security, cyber security, \nand information security) and safety (including emergency management, and environment, safety, and \nhealth) programs. It also emphasizes the two areas that are necessary for the Department to achieve its mission in the most efficient and effective manner, i.e., increased use of technology and effective management and development of human capital.\nIn order to achieve its vision and perform its goals, it is necessary for SSA to maintain a highly qualified \nworkforce with the expertise and skills necessary to support, manage, and conduct security and independent oversight operations now and in the foreseeable future. The SSA workforce is, and must\nbe, comprised of world-class security and safety professionals grounded in science, engineering, and \ntechnology led by effective program and project managers with exceptional communications and marketing skills and supported by innovative resource management experts.\nSSA requires the technical support of national-level experts to perform all its security, safety, and \nindependent oversight activities. Contractor support continues to be a pr acticable and cost–effective\nmeans to provide a surge pool of technical experts, as opposed to expanding the Federal employee base.\nThe following external factor could affect SSA’s ability to achieve its strategic goal, revisions to the \nDesign Basis Threat Policy. Revisions to the Design Basis Threat Policy based on changing geopolitical conditions have the greatest potential for affecting SSA’s mission, priorities, and stated performance targets. Type and number of training courses developed and conducted, type and numbers of \ntechnologies deployed, and scope of independent oversight appraisals performed are all dependent and \nreliant upon current Design Basis Threat Policy timelines and depth of coverage.\nSSA places a high degree of emphasis on working with DOE program and other staff offices to ensure \nthat security and safety issues are identified and adequately addressed. SSA also interfaces with \norganizations external to DOE to enhance the security posture of the United States as well as other \nforeign states that maintain inventories of nuclear material. SSA maintains strong relationships with the following DOE organizations:\n/squarecentOffice of the Chief Information Officer (CIO)\n/squarecentOffice of Environment, Safety and Health (EH)\n/squarecentOffice of Intelligence (IN)\n/squarecentOffice of Counterintelligence (CN)\n/squarecentNational Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)\n/squarecentOffice of Energy, Science, and Environment (ESE)\n/squarecentDOE Inspector General (IG)\nPage 18 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional Budget/squarecent\nDOE Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs (CI)\n/squarecentOffice of General Council (GC)\nSSA also maintains strong relationships with the following U.S. Government Departments and Agencies\n/squarecentDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB)\n/squarecentNuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)\n/squarecentDepartment of State (DOS)\n/squarecentDepartment of Defense (DoD)\n/squarecentDepartment of Homeland Security (DHS)\n/squarecentFederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)\n/squarecentNational Security Council (NSC)\n/squarecentOffice of Personnel Management (OPM)\nValidation and Verification\nTo validate and verify program performance, SSA will continuously monitor achievements for all \nperformance targets through weekly reporting mechanisms and periodic meetings with office directors.In addition, appraisal performance targets will be verified and validated by the development of \ndocumented reports.\nSignificant Policy or Program Shifts\n/squarecentCivil Penalties for Classified Information Security Violations Implementation : The Secretary of\nEnergy directed SSA to be responsible for implementing Section 234B to the Atomic Energy Act of \n1954 as specified in the final rule in 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 824. The rule implements \nthe requirements for issuing civil penalties for any person who enters into a contract or subcontractwith the Department and who violates any applicable rule, regulation, or Order issued by the \nSecretary of Energy relating to the safeguarding or security of Restricted Data or other classified or \n“sensitive information.” Currently security directives are being reviewed to identify and insert \nappropriate language to account for this activity. SSA is also in the process of developing the means and strategies for full implementation using the current Price Anderson Enforcement program as a model.\n/squarecentIncreased Emphasis on Technology Deployment : The deployment of security technologies is a \nkey strategy to avoid significant manpower increases that would otherwise be required to conform to\nthe Department’s updated Design Basis Threat Policy. Towards that end, funding will be directed \nfor the purchase and installation of systems determined to have a positive impact on security \neffectiveness as determined through the Design Basis Threat Site Assistance Visit analysis process.The chosen technologies to be procured will be coordinated with the National Nuclear SecurityAdministration and other DOE program offices to ensure that security and safety requirements are \nbeing addressed, that training and systems effectiveness procedures are in place, and that \npromulgation of lessons learned throughout the complex is accomplished.\nPage 19 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetFacilities Maintenance and Repair\nThe Department’s Facilities Maintenance and Repair activities are tied to its programmatic mission, \ngoals, and objectives. Facilities Maintenance and Repair activities funded by this budget are displayed \nbelow.\nIndirect-Funded Maintenance and Repair\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nNew Brunswick Laboratory ................................................................ ............ 425 425 425\nTotal Indirect-Funded Maintenance and Repair ............................................. . 425 425 425\nDirect-Funded Maintenance and Repair\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nNew Brunswick Laboratory ................................................................ ............ 0 0 601\nTotal Direct-Funded Maintenance and Repair................................................ . 0 0 601\nPage 20 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetOther Defense Activities\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance (SSA)\nFunding by Site by Program\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nArgonne National Laboratory\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 1,000 750 500\nChicago Operations Office \nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 1,655 2,169 1,925\nHanford Site\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 89 89 0\nIdaho National Laboratory \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 1,712 6,390 1,618\nIdaho Operations Office \nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 1,084 1,216 1,177\nKansas City Site Office\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 215 15 15\nLawrence Livermore National Laboratory\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 2,042 1,899 1,471\nLos Alamos National Laboratory\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 3,482 3,344 527\nNational Training Center \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 11,175 14,033 14,756\nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 1,200 1,491 2,312\nTotal, National Training Center ................................................................... . 12,375 15,524 17,068\nNevada Site Office\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 1,413 1,563 470\nNew Brunswick Laboratory\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 946 885 1,480\nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 5,591 5,878 6,113\nTotal, New Brunswick Laboratory................................................................ . 6,537 6,763 7,593\nNNSA Service Center \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 000\nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 26,794 27,713 21,177\nProgram Direction ................................................................................. . 61 61 61\nTotal, NNSA Service Center................................................................ .......... 26,855 27,774 21,238\nPage 21 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nOak Ridge Institute for Science & Education \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 650 491 887\nOak Ridge National Laboratory \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 0 382 1,064\nOak Ridge Operations Office \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 220 220 290\nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 2,988 3,265 3,434\nTotal, Oak Ridge Operations Office .............................................................. . 3,208 3,485 3,724\nOffice of Scientific and Technical Information\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 490 240 300\nOffice of Secure Transportation \nProgram Direction ................................................................................. . 250 250 250\nPacific Northwest National Laboratory \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 3,714 3,175 6,509\nProgram Direction ................................................................................. . 250 250 250\nTotal, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory .............................................. . 3,964 3,425 6,759\nPantex Plant\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 25 9 0\nPittsburgh Naval Reactors \nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 460 441 395\nRichland Operations Office \nSecurity Inve stigations ................................................................ ........... 742 398 1,001\nSandia National Laboratories \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 9,964 8,883 8,941\nSavannah River Operations Office \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 4,402 3,962 4,675\nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 3,879 2,977 2,307\nTotal, Savannah River Oper ations Off ice...................................................... . 8,281 6,939 6,982\nSavannah River Site \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 2,450 2,426 1,911\nSchenectady Naval Reactors \nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 22 32 44\nPage 22 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nWashington Headquarters \nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... .148,805 136,051 137,034\nSecurity Inves tigations ................................................................ ........... 5,737 6,556 6,228\nProgram Direction ................................................................................. . 76,083 66,318 69,275\nTotal, Washington Headquarters ................................................................... .230,625 208,925 212,537\nY-12 National Security Complex\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ........................................................... . 1,000 202 100\nTotal, Other Defense Activities ..................................................................... .320,590 304,024 298,497\nMajor Changes or Shifts by Site\nSecurity Investigations: The reinvestigation workload is projected to be 43 percent lower in FY 2007\nas compared to FY 2006. This is due to the backlog of cases at the Federal Bureau of Investigation \n(FBI) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the two agencies that perform the investigations \nfor DOE, as a result of the terrorist attack on the United States in 2001. Reinvestigation workloads are expected to return to nominal levels in FY 2008. The following locations are effected by this workload reduction: Idaho Operations Center, NNSA Service Center, Oak Ridge Operations Center, Pittsburgh \nNaval Reactors, Richland Operations Center, Savannah River Operations Office, Schenectady Naval \nReactors, and Washington Headquarters.\nSite Description\nArgonne National Laboratory (ANL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: ANL supports tasks associated with the Foreign Ownership, Control,\nor Influence (FOCI) program by providing DOE a computer-based system (e-FOCI) that facilitates a \nthorough DOE investigation of foreign ownership, control, or influence on contracts and subcontracts involving access to classified information of special nuclear materials.\nChicago Operations Office\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees and \ncontractors.\nHanford Site (Hanford)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: Hanford provides field expertise, technical support for the review, \nupdate, and consolidation of security orders, policies, and field guidance.\nIdaho National Laboratory (INL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: INL provides onsite participation and field assistance for facilities’ \nPage 23 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetSite Safeguards and Security Plan development and review, specialized security engineering support, \nand day-to-day technical support of the Headquarters’ security alarm and access control system.\nIdaho Operations Office\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees and \ncontractors.\nKansas City Site Office\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: Funding provides for specialized technical expertise for the \nproduction of specialty electronic security devices such as the Secure Safe product, which is used as a \ntechnological awareness tool to notify users when their security containers are unlocked or in an open \nstate.\nSpecialized technical expertise and support is provided to the Classification, Declassification, and \nControlled Information Program in the development of classification guidance covering the following \nareas: weapons, material production, material disposition, technology, chemical/biological weapons, and intelligence.\nLawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: The LLNL technology development program focuses on physical \nsecurity activities with an emphasis on advancing capabilities in alarm control and display systems.\nThe Classification, Declassification, and Controlled Information Program is supported by providing \nspecialized technical expertise in the development of classification guidance covering the following areas: nuclear weapons, material production, material disposition, computer codes, arms control, \nsubcritical experimentation (experiments, in lieu of weapon testing, conducted underground at the \nNevada Test Site with very small amounts of plutonium and high explosives), homeland security, \nguidance streamlining initiative, novel methods of uranium enrichment, and intelligence issues. In addition, LLNL provides analysis and reports on the detailed content and proliferation potential of certain nuclear weapon-related information available in the public domain.\nLos Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: LANL provides onsite participation and field assistance for facilities’ \nSite Safeguards and Security Plan development and review, specialized security engineering support, \nsurvey support, and day-to-day technical support of the Headquarters’ programs.\nOther LANL activities include specialized technical expertise and support to the Classification, \nDeclassification, and Controlled Information Program in the development of classification guidance \ncovering the following areas: weapons, material production, material disposition, computer codes, commercial inorganic membranes (permits private sector to utilize gaseous diffusion technology to develop filters for commercial use), centrifuges, and novel methods of uranium enrichment.\nPage 24 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetNational Training Center (NTC)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: The NTC is located in Albuquerque, NM, and is the lead resource \nwithin DOE in the development of standardized, state-of-the-art safety and security training programs \nand for integrating comprehensive and professionally executed training, education, and vocational \nservices. The NTC provides training and education services and support to the Department through the \nSafeguards and Security Central Training Academy; Foreign Interaction Training Academy; Counterintelligence Training Academy; and Accelerated Access Authorization Program Test Center.\nSince September 11, 2001, NTC has been actively involved in conducting DOE training and education \nfor a major component of the Homeland Defense effort. This includes: identifying and countering foreign intelligence threats; providing value-added defensive counterintelligence; and conducting employee self-defense briefings, debriefings, and specific awareness training about national security \nissues.\nSecurity Investigations: The NTC receives funding for maintaining two Accelerated Access \nAuthorization Program (AAAP) DOE Test Centers that are located in Albuquerque, NM, and Oak \nRidge, TN. The AAAP expedites the placement of urgently required personnel through processing a \n“Q” interim access authorization prior to completion of the standard background investigation.\nProgram Direction: Funding supports salaries and benefits, travel, training, and contractual services in \nsupport of the Federal personnel.\nNevada Site Office\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: Activities conducted at the Remote Sensing Laboratory and the \nSpecial Technologies Laboratory focus on deployment of advanced physical security technologies to assist protective force personnel threat response capabilities. Activities are focused on developing\nsystems that provide a real-time status and effectiveness of security forces; technology transfer of a friend/foe identification system; and a capability to monitor radio communications around facilities.\nNew Brunswick Laboratory (NBL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: NBL, located in Argonne, IL, is the U.S. Government’s certifying \nauthority for nuclear reference materials. NBL’s technical capabilities enhance domestic nuclear \nsecurity and support international nonproliferation efforts.\nProgram Direction: Funding supports salaries and benefits, travel, training, and contractual services in \nsupport of the Federal personnel.\nNNSA Service Center\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees and contractors.\nProgram Direction: Funding provides for the maintenance, storage, and delivery of the Multiple \nPage 25 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetIntegrated Laser Engagement Systems (MILES) equipment used by SSA to simulate weapons fire \nduring force-on-force tactical field exercises in support of Independent Oversight assessment activities.\nOak Ridge Institute for Science & Education (ORISE)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: ORISE provides technical support for the implementation, training, \noperation, and quality assurance of the DOE Human Reliability Program, and a variety of research and \nanalysis activities in support of the personnel security function. ORISE also provides support to the Security Awareness Special Interest Group, which is a forum for Security Awareness Coordinators to \ndisseminate vital security awareness information, media, and tools.\nOak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: ORNL technology development focuses on material control \ntechnologies with an emphasis on vault monitoring systems, seals, and tamper indicating devices to alert protective forces to the unauthorized access or removal of nuclear materials.\nOak Ridge Operations Office (OR)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: OR provides support to the Classification, Declassification, and \nControlled Information Program by: reviewing documents for declassification requested under the \nEnergy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program and Environment, Safety, and Health \ncivil suits, as well as in support of the large-scale declassification program; and by providing technical expertise and support for the development of classification guidance covering the following areas: nuclear weapons, material production, material disposition, commercial inorganic membranes (permits \nprivate sector to utilize gaseous diffusion technology to develop filters for commercial use), centrifuges, \nand novel methods of uranium enrichment.\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees and \ncontractors.\nThe Accelerated Access Authorization Program (AAAP) test center located in Oak Ridge, TN, is funded \nthrough the National Training Center, Albuquerque, NM, through a Washington D.C. (Headquarters) \ncontract. The AAAP expedites the placement of urgently required personnel through processing a “Q”\ninterim access authorization prior to completion of the standard background investigation.\nOffice of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: Efforts are focused on capturing historical and current security \ninformation, converting this information to electronic documents, and providing timely access and analysis capabilities for the security policy staff.\nSupport is also provided for the Classification, Declassification, and Controlled Information Program by \nimproving the access capability to DOE’s OpenNet database and maintaining a thesaurus and dictionary for the automated classification guidance system used in the electronic Classification Guidance System.\nPage 26 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetOffice of Secure Transportation (OST)\nProgram Direction: OST, located on Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, NM, provides \nmaintenance, storage, and delivery of Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System equipment used to \nconduct protective force performance testing. This equipment is used to simulate weapons fire in \ntactical field exercises that support the assessment of the overall effectiveness of field protection \nprograms.\nPacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: PNNL provides technical expertise, assistance, and awareness in \nsupport of information security, which includes programs in technical surveillance countermeasures, operations security, and classified matter protection and control. Activities include providing technical \nexpertise in support of security policy activities and the review of local security program implementation\nprograms and the development of recommendations for resolving security issues across DOE. Technical assistance is provided to support special nuclear material consolidation, Site Safeguards and Security Plans, Site Security Plans, and performance testing. PNNL provides operational support and \nmaintenance for the DOE security Incident Tracking and Analysis Capability system as well as \ntechnical, analytical, operational, and support to the Foreign Access Central Tracking System.\nTechnical and administrative support is provided to PNNL to facilitate deployment of selected security \ntechnologies into operational facilities. In addition, specialized technical support is provided to the \nClassification, Declassification, and Controlled Information Program in the development of classification guidance covering the following areas: weapons, material production, material disposition, technology, chemical and biological weapons, critical infrastructure, and intelligence.\nProgram Direction: PNNL develops processes and protocols used in support of Independent Oversight \nimplementation, planning, and analysis of appraisal results and trends. PNNL also provides technical support for the conduct of Independent Oversight special studies and reviews. \nPantex Plant\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: Technical expertise and support is provided to the Classification, \nDeclassification, and Controlled Information Program in the development of classification guidance \ncovering the following areas: nuclear weapons production and military use, stockpile stewardship, and \nspecific nuclear weapon system guidance.\nPittsburgh Naval Reactors\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees.\nRichland Operations Office\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees and \ncontractors.\nPage 27 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetSandia National Laboratories (SNL)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: SNL focuses on development of technologies and systems required to \nprotect the Department from catastrophic consequences of such circumstances as use of nuclear \nweapons and/or material for malevolent purposes or the erosion of national security secrets through theft \nor diversion of classified materials or information. Technical assistance is provided for assessment of site vulnerability analyses and Site Safeguards and Security Plans. The technology deployment program focuses on physical security technologies to protect and secure the DOE complex. Activities include \ndeploying active denial technologies; countermeasures for security equipment vulnerabilities; and \nenhanced protective force technologies, such as deployment of a weapon stabilization platform for an armored response vehicle. SNL also provides updates to the Adversary Timeline Analysis Software to more accurately and realistically model DOE security systems and analyze them for vulnerabilities and \ndevelops simulation tools to allow a single analyst to determine the probability of neutralizing\nadversaries, at significantly reduced cost.\nSNL also provides technical expertise to the Classification, Declassification, and Controlled Information \nProgram in the development of Headquarters classification guidance covering the following areas: \nnuclear weapons, nuclear weapon production and military use, stockpile stewardship, chemical/biological weapons, nuclear smuggling, computer codes, and intelligence.\nSavannah River Operations Office\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: The Savannah River Operations Office has contract administration \nand security responsibilities for the Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System as the U.S. \nGovernment’s official accounting system on the possession, use, and shipment of nuclear material.\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees and contractors.\nSavannah River Site (SRS)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: SRS supports nuclear material control and accountability through the \ndevelopment, enhancement, deployment, and operation of the Local Area Nuclear Material \nAccountability Software application for nuclear materials accountability throughout the DOE complex.This technology allows greater reliability, efficiency, and cost savings through increased standardization and use of advanced software technologies.\nSchenectady Naval Reactors\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees.\nWashington Headquarters\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: The Headquarters program has responsibility for management and \nPage 28 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional Budgetimplementation of the:\n/squarecentHeadquarters Security Protective Force;\n/squarecentHeadquarters Technical Surveillance Countermeasures program;\n/squarecentDOE Safeguards and Security Information Management System database;\n/squarecentMaintenance and upgrade of alarm systems, access control systems, related computer equipment;\nand protective force equipment;\n/squarecentDOE Continuity of Government programs; \n/squarecentClassification and declassification of nuclear weapons-related technology data;\n/squarecentManagement of the Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System, as a co-sponsor with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and,\n/squarecentManagement of the DOE Foreign Travel Management System.\nSecurity Investigations: Funding provides for background investigations conducted by the Federal \nBureau of Investigation and the Office of Personnel Management for DOE Federal employees and \ncontractors.\nHeadquarters also funds the development and maintenance of Department-wide access authorization \nsecurity databases and their subsequent integration via the electronic Government DOE Integrated \nSecurity System+ (eDISS+). The eDISS+ initiative consists of a set of interrelated databases, associated client applications, and web pages that provide a mechanism to automate the processing and tracking of access authorization requests Department-wide. The eDISS+ system also allows electronic \ncommunications between DOE offices and the transmission of investigative requests directly from DOE \noffices to OPM.\nProgram Direction: The SSA Federal personnel serve as the operational element for activities that\ninclude: Department-wide security policy; the security training mission at the National Training Center \nin Albuquerque, NM; Department-wide control and accountability of plutonium, uranium, and special materials at the New Brunswick Laboratory in Argonne, IL; classification and declassification operations; accountability for foreign national visits and assignments and official foreign travel; executive protection; Headquarters security operations; the DOE Continuity of Government programs; \nand the Independent Oversight program. SSA also provides administrative support to the Office of the \nDepartmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. Program direction provides funding for the Federal staff to include salaries, benefits, travel, training, Working Capital Fund, and other personnel-related expenses.\nAdditionally, funding provides contractor support which provides a practical and cost-effective method \nof providing short-term technical expertise in specific safety and security disciplines for supporting the SSA mission, including security; cyber security; emergency management; and environment, safety, and \nhealth.\nY-12 National Security Complex (Y-12)\nNuclear Safeguards and Security: The Y-12 technology deployment program provides physical security \nPage 29 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Funding By Site FY 2007 Congressional Budgettechnologies focusing on protective force survivability and chemical defense measures. The Y-12\ncomplex also serves as a test bed to evaluate security technology prototypes developed through the SSA Technology Development and Deployment Program.\nY-12 also provides technical expertise and support to the Classification, Declassification, and Controlled \nInformation Program in the development of classification guidance covering the following areas: nuclear \nweapons, material production, material disposition, technology, chemical/biological, intelligence, and \nthe development of automated guidance streamlining technologies and techniques to manage classification policy and guidance.\nPage 30 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance FY 2007 Congressional BudgetSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance\nFunding Profile by Subprogram\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005\nCurrent\nAppropriationFY 2006 \nOriginal\nAppropriationFY 2006 \nAdjustmentsaFY 2006 \nCurrent\nAppropriationFY 2007\nRequest\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance\nNuclear Safeguards and Security ......... 193,794b186,878 -1,869 185,009 182,548\nSecurity Investigations ......................... 44,561 46,725 -467 46,258 40,000\nProgram Direction ................................ 82,235c73,492 -735 72,757 75,949\nTotal, Other Defense Activities................... 320,590d307,095 -3,071 304,024 298,497\nPublic Law Authorizations:\nP.L. 83-703, “Atomic Energy Act of 1954”\nP.L. 95-242, “Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978”P.L. 103.62, “Government Performance Results Act of 1993”\nH.R. 4200, P.L. 108-375, Sec. 3103, “Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2005”\nP.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006.\nMission\nSSA provides for the development, promulgation, and evaluation of security programs, and the \nindependent oversight of security; cyber security; emergency management; and environment, safety, and health programs throughout the Department; and provides security-related services to DOE Headquarters. SSA also provides administrative support to the Office of the Departmental \nRepresentative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.\nBenefits\nDOE must implement effective security programs in an increasingly challenging threat environment.\nThe primary focus of SSA is on effectively and efficiently implementing protection programs that fully respond to the evolving Design Basis Threat Policy by addressing programmatic and technical uncertainties and establishing cooperation and useful dialog between managers and security \nprofessionals at all levels. Towards this end, and in support of the unprecedented security initiatives \nannounced by the Secretary in May 2004, SSA is: 1) streamlining existing security policies to remove \na Reflects a 1% rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes \nin the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006.\nb FY 2005 includes $10,029,000 used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers. Funding was\ntransferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\nc FY 2005 includes $4,579,000 used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers. Funding was \ntransferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\nd FY 2005 includes $14,608,000 used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers. Funding was \ntransferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\nPage 31 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance FY 2007 Congressional Budgetambiguity in roles, responsibilities, and requirements; eliminate conflicts; and incorporate recent \nupdates; 2) emphasizing the deployment of innovative security technology to transition from manpowerintensive to engineered systems that provide greater security at reduced lifecycle costs; 3) advancing the\nprofessional development of DOE security and safety personnel to ensure that their training is \nresponsive to the needs of the DOE community; 4) increasing the capabilities and responsiveness of the \nprotective force; and 5) improving the defensive posture of DOE.\nSSA also identifies and reports to senior DOE managers on site-specific and Department-wide issues \nregarding security, cyber security, emergency management, environment, safety, and health, \nclassification and declassification programs, and other programs using an efficient, systematic \nindependent oversight process that emphasizes performance and performance testing; conducts follow-up activities to determine the effectiveness of corrective actions; and promotes line management self-assessment activities, thereby enhancing overall performance in these program areas. In addition, SSA \nprovides cross-organizational support to DOE efforts to resolve Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety \nBoard-related technical and management issues necessary to ensure public health and safety.\nPage 32 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional BudgetNuclear Safeguards and Security\nFunding Schedule by Activity\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006aFY 2007\nNuclear Safeguards and Security\nOperational Support ..................................................................................... 162,001b152,507 153,730\nTechnology Development and Systems De ployment................................... 14,519 14,374 15,640\nClassification, Declassification, and Controlled Information Program ........ 17,274 13,178 13,178\nProject Engineering and Design (Idaho) ...................................................... 0 4,950 0\nTotal, Nuclear Safeguards and Security .............................................................. 193,794b185,009 182,548\nDescription\nThe mission of the Nuclear Safeguards and Security subprogram is to provide support to Federal staff \nfor security policy development, interpretation, and guidance; the development and conduct of security and safety training; overseeing the development, application, and deployment of new security technologies throughout DOE; and development and management of the Department’s classification and \ncontrolled information program. In addition, this subprogram provides for specialized security support \nrelated to security issues and incidents tracking; nuclear materials accountability; foreign visits, \nassignments, and travel; and foreign ownership and control programs. Nuclear Safeguards and Security also provides operational support to DOE Headquarters by managing the physical protection and \nsecurity of DOE facilities and information in the National Capital Area, and providing for the \nDepartment’s Continuity of Government facilities.\nThe Program Goals of SSA will be accomplished not only through the efforts of the direct (GPRA Unit) \nprograms but with additional efforts from subprograms which support the GPRA Units in carrying out \ntheir mission. NSS performs the following functions in support of the overall mission of SSA.\nBenefits\nSafeguard and security policies and other guidance materials are developed and maintained to ensure the \nDepartment’s programs are responsive to national security needs and changing threat environments, and enable line management, through Headquarters and field organizations, to implement effective security \nprograms in a timely manner. Security and safety training is provided to develop and maintain the \nproficiency and competency of DOE safety and security personnel in support of the President’s and the Department’s human capital management strategies thereby ensuring the protection of the public, thedepartmental workforce, and critical assets and national security. National laboratory resources are \nutilized to develop and deploy the most promising and urgently needed technologies pertaining to \nnuclear material safeguards and physical security, emphasizing engineering in place of administrative \na Reflects a reduction of $1,869,000 for the 1% rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental \nAppropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006.\nb FY 2005 funding includes $10,029,000 used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers. Program\nwas transferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\nPage 33 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budgetcontrols to diminish the Department’s reliance on increased manpower levels as the primary means to \nstrengthen security programs. In addition, nuclear material control and accountability processes are developed in order to provide information necessary to track nuclear material for the purposes of \nsatisfying statutory requirements and international obligations; developing and/or providing protection\nof the material both for safety and security purposes; and managing sensitive nuclear materials in \nsupport of nuclear materials consolidation, nuclear nonproliferation, emergency response, and material \ndisposition planning efforts.\nCentralized information management pertaining to security issues, risk management, vulnerability \nassessments, nuclear/biological/chemical protection; and foreign visits, assignments, and travel \nprograms is provided enabling DOE and other U.S. Government Departments and Agencies to determine the potential for an undue risk to individual sites, the Department as a whole, and/or the common defense and national security. Information control programs help to mitigate national security \nthreats by preventing adversaries from acquiring information regarding weapons of mass destruction or \nother data that has the potential of damaging the Nation’s energy infrastructure by developing policies and guidance to identify critical information warranting protection.\nThis subprogram also provides DOE Headquarters with round-the-clock services pertaining to physical \nprotection and security for DOE operations in the National Capital Area ensuring the safety of DOE and visiting personnel and departmental and other U.S. Government assets and facilities. This subprogram also maintains the facilities and equipment the Department requires to continue operations in the event \nof a catastrophic event rendering the Washington, D.C., offices inoperable.\nDetailed Justification\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nOperational Support ......................................................... .162,001 152,507 153,730\nThe mission of the Operational Support activity is to provide technical and analytical expertise that \nenhances the Department’s security mission effectiveness through policy development, comprehensive \nstandardized training, professional development programs, specialized security support, and operational support to DOE Headquarters. In addition, this activity provides for the development of safety-relatedtraining and professional development programs.\n/squarecentSecurity Activities ....................................................... . 94,934 97,714 96,787\nFunding is provided to identify and communicate information necessary to ensure adequate protection of the Department's national security assets by providing relevant, timely, objective and unbiased analysis of data from multiple sources. This activity coordinates, directs, and performs highly specialized activities to protect DOE assets through the analysis of information using a highly \nspecialized workforce.\n/squarecentSecurity and Safety Training ..................................... . 11,175 14,033 14,756\nFunding is provided to develop and maintain the proficiency and competency of DOE safety and \nsecurity personnel through standardized training, education, and professional development services; \nand for conducting workforce analyses and career development programs required for the protection \nPage 34 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nof the environment, safety and health of the public, departmental workforce, and critical assets and \nnational security. The National Training Center (NTC), located in Albuquerque, NM, is the designated Center of Excellence for security and safety training and the primary resource for \nperforming these functions.\nCourse curriculum development and presentation of training represent the largest portion of the \nfunding base. The funding is used to support the NTC safety program and the nuclear security \ntraining operations including the development and presentation of weapons firing courses and \ninstruction and academic courses to qualify security personnel for security duties throughout DOE.Additionally, funds are used to support specialized courses in personnel security, information security, safe handling of nuclear materials, and vulnerability assessments. Training is provided to \nthe DOE security complex utilizing the facilities at the NTC and other DOE sites, e.g., Los Alamos \nNational Laboratory, as well as through the DOE’s security distance-learning program. NTC also deploys safety and security training teams to DOE field sites to maximize cost savings while \nmaintaining the integrity of training.\nFunding provides for continued analyses of an integrated security systems training platform to \naddress deficiencies in training methodologies for security and safety professionals. The analysis of an advanced DOE training facility concept provides DOE with options for developing realistic \ntraining in a hands-on simulated environment that assimilates multiple aspects of an integrated \nsecurity system.\nIn support of the President’s Management Agenda regarding the strategic management of human \ncapital and the Department’s Human Capital Management Strategic Plan, the NTC continues to \ndevelop and provide Professional Development Programs for security and safety personnel. These programs are part of the Department's strategic planning instruments for addressing the experiencedrain within the security and safety communities. The Professional Development Programs provide a comprehensive set of training courses to support the Department’s professional development \nrequirements and addresses the Secretarial Security Initiatives.\nIn addition to course development, funding is used for the operation and maintenance of the NTC \nfacilities. NTC facilities are spread across four distinct areas permitted to DOE by both the U.S. Air \nForce and the U.S. Forest Service. Additionally, space no longer used by the Air Force and Sandia \nNational Laboratories, is used for storage of sensitive items, e.g., weapons systems and ammunition.\nOperation and maintenance funding also provides for utility and telecommunications services for \nFederal and contractor personnel and management of support programs necessary to provide for a \nsafe and environmentally sound operation that conforms with the requirements of the Occupational \nSafety and Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and state and local laws and regulations. Specific projects identified for FY 2007 include upgrades to the Live Fire Range to address safety and environmental issues.\n/squarecentNuclear Materials Accountability .............................. 7,998 7,472 8,416\nThe mission of this activity is to provide information necessary to inventory and track nuclear \nPage 35 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nmaterial, primarily within the United States, for the purposes of satisfying statutory requirements and \ninternational obligations and treaties; developing and/or providing protection of the material both for safety and security purposes; and managing sensitive nuclear materials. These programs and projects \nsupport nuclear materials consolidation, nuclear nonproliferation, emergency response, and material \ndisposition planning efforts. The mission is also supported by development and maintenance of calibration equipment, materials, and methodologies by a central Federal authority to assure reliable and accurate safeguards measurements of nuclear materials. This activity also provides expertise to\nsites requiring field support and in the enhancement of nuclear material control and accountability \n(MC&A) policy, and research and development needs.\nThe primary resource for performing nuclear material measurement activities is the New Brunswick \nLaboratory (NBL), located in Argonne, IL. Funding provides for NBL to purchase base materials \nused for preparing certified reference materials and calibration standards; to purchase, operate, and maintain instruments and equipment used for certification and other safeguards measurements; and for the development of methods and performance criteria for nondestructive assay measurement of \nnuclear material. NBL provides certified reference materials to users, and maintains accurate \nstandards and comprehensive procedures to ensure that consistent results are obtained from various destructive and nondestructive analysis techniques, thereby ensuring that DOE’s nuclear materials accounts are based on defensible measured values. Funding also provides for the cost of facility\nmaintenance and upgrades related to activity operations and for radioactive waste management incurred for handling, storage, and processing waste to meet DOE, Federal, State, and local environmental regulations.\nGlobal nuclear materials accountability activities provide for the maintenance and operation of the \nNuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System (NMMSS). NMMSS is an electronic information system comprised of software, hardware, procedures, and reports and meets the statutory requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and international treaties. NMMSS is \nthe central component of the U.S. Government’s accounting system for the possession, use, and \nshipment of nuclear material within the United States and abroad. NMMSS is funded jointly by \nDOE and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and is used to collate, maintain, and report data regarding nuclear material inventories, material balances, and transactions of U.S. Government-owned, foreign obligated, and privately owned nuclear material. Reports derived from \nNMMSS are provided to U.S. Government organizations including the NRC and the State \nDepartment, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and foreign governments that receive U.S.-owned nuclear materials. Nuclear material management and safeguards data from more than 700 U.S. Government and commercial nuclear facilities is tracked on a “by site” basis. NMMSS supports \nthe detection, assessment, and reporting of loss, diversion, or theft of nuclear materials. NMMSS \nsupports implementation of the Design basis Threat Policy in the identification of attractive targets for adversary attack, thereby assisting in the prioritization, development, and deployment of protection for the most vulnerable assets. Accounting for nuclear materials is required by DOE \nOrder 470.4, Safeguards and Security Program through DOE Manual 470.4-6, Nuclear Material \nControl and Accountability (formerly DOE O 470 and DOE M 474.1-1A and -1B).\nPage 36 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nThe primary tool developed to provide nuclear materials accountability within DOE at the site level \nis the Local Area Nuclear Material Accountability Software (LANMAS). LANMAS is an SSA-\ndeveloped tool designed specifically to provide DOE sites with a standardized application for \ntracking nuclear material by item and location. The software application can be used on both stand-\nalone and local area network computer systems. LANMAS supports accurate and timely onsite nuclear material inventory information and is used, in combination with other site security elements, to account for, detect, assess, and report the theft or diversion of nuclear materials. LANMAS also \nhas the potential to be integrated with site processing operations aligned with the Department’s \nenterprise architecture to improve efficiencies and reduce costs associated with safeguarding and managing nuclear materials. Information managed by this software is used to account for day-to-dayactivities at the site level, perform corporate-level quality assurance activities regarding material\ntransactions, and provide timely, information regarding the location of material throughout the DOE \ncomplex for use in emergency response management. LANMAS demonstrates a cost savings for DOE by minimizing duplication of software development.\nThe primary tool for inventorying radioactive sealed source materials throughout the Department is \nthe Radiological Source Registry and Tracking (RSRT) database. RSRT provides the Department with an inventory tool to meet international guidance for registering and inventorying high-risksealed sources and assists in the determination of potential radiological sabotage targets. The \ndatabase is updated annually through a Department-wide data call. Information in the RSRT can be \nused to monitor the location and use of sealed sources; detect and act on discrepancies in inventory, assist in vulnerability studies and emergency response activities, and provide greater security andmanagement for high-risk radioactive sealed sources. The NRC is in the process of developing rules \nfor the control and accountability of sealed sources, as prescribed in the Energy Policy Act of 2005.\nRSRT is the current mechanism that will be used by DOE to report to the NRC when the final rules are promulgated.\n/squarecentSpecialized Security Support ...................................... 13,646 11,103 8,448\nSpecialized security support activities provide technical and field expertise support to the Federal \nstaff to develop and evaluate implementation of Department-wide security requirements; develop and disseminate security awareness information; maintain various security-related data base systems; manage the foreign ownership, control or influence and foreign visits, assignments, and travel programs; and conduct vulnerability assessments in support of the implementation of the Design \nBasis Threat Policy.\nFunding provides subject matter and technical expertise in a wide variety of security disciplines to \nassist in the development of security requirements and performance measures related to security \nprogram planning and management (e.g., Site Safeguards and Security Plans and self assessment \nprograms and surveys); information security; physical protection systems; protective force operations; personnel security; nuclear material control and accountability; and Design Basis Threat Policy implementation and related vulnerability assessments. Personnel security support provides \ntechnical expertise in support of the Human Reliability Program; a program designed to ensure that \nindividuals who occupy positions with access to special nuclear materials, nuclear explosive devices, \nPage 37 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nfacilities, and programs meet the highest standards of reliability and physical and mental suitability.\nFunding provides for the development of training materials for program enrollees, medical staff, certifying officials, and supervisors; and for research on medical, legal, and safety topics in support \nof guidance development and amendment of requirements. Other security-related support provides \nfor expert advice and assistance in the development of requirements for physical security systems; explosive detection systems, and integrated alarm management and control systems. Support is also provided to analyze the effects of new and emerging threats and security technologies, and evaluate \nevolving information security, nuclear material control and accountability, physical security, and \nprotective force issues. Funding also provides for the conduct and management of DOE-wide quality panels consisting of subject matter experts from field locations that provide critical feedback for keeping security policies current and effective.\nDepartment-wide security awareness support is provided through the Security Awareness Special \nInterest Group, a long-standing professional organization of DOE and contractor Safeguards and Security Awareness Coordinators. This group provides a mechanism for sharing awareness methods \nand products, solving problems, and disseminating security-related information to satisfy Presidential \nand regulatory requirements. Funding provides security awareness coordinators the tools and information needed to communicate information to employees regarding threats to security and the individual’s role within the security program as protection levels and strategies change or are \nincreased. The President’s electronic Government initiative concepts are incorporated into this \nactivity by utilizing electronic information systems for the delivery of required security briefings and other security information. Funding provides for monthly teleconferences, an annual workshop, and a group web site.\nInformation used throughout the DOE security complex regarding security issues related to policy \nimplementation is maintained in the Safeguards and Security Information Management System, a centralized database that serves as the master repository of current and historical DOE security deficiencies, from both internal and external sources, and associated corrective actions. This system \nallows for the trending and analysis of security issues in order to identify systemic security issues and \nareas that may require additional oversight, or indicators of continuing or future security concerns within DOE. The database also maintains facility security ratings, a listing of facility security offices for more than 2,000 cleared DOE facilities, classified mailing addresses for over 500 facilities \nauthorized to receive classified matter, and classified contracts and surveys. Funding supports \noperational and basic maintenance of the database and upgrades to the secure communication hardware. Information regarding incidents involving unauthorized disclosures and compromises of classified information is maintained in the Incident Tracking and Analysis Capability database.\nFunding supports the operation of the system and routine trending and analysis reports for use by \nvarious departmental entities. Funding also provides for field assistance activities associated with the continued rollout of remote incident tracking and analysis terminals at field locations.\nThe electronic foreign ownership, control, or influence (e-FOCI) database system supports the FOCI \nprogram designed to determine whether potential or existing contractors of the Department are owned, controlled, or influenced by a foreign entity and, as a result, the potential for undue risk to \nPage 38 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nnational security. This electronic-Government initiative system reduces the time necessary for \nanalysis of information prior to award of contracts and enhances field elements’ ability to tailor solutions for classified contracts necessary for local operational needs and missions. Funding\nsupports the operation and maintenance of the e-FOCI database; continued development of automated \ndata entry and reporting functions, including the maintenance of a web site for private industry to submit information for determinations and approvals; and the development of a deviation tracking and analysis capability and a system to track classified information that has been approved for sharing with \ninternational partners.\nThe Foreign Visits, Assignments and Travel (FVAT) Program implements programs to manage the \nsecurity aspects of DOE interactions with foreign nationals visiting or assigned to DOE sites and \nDOE-sponsored official foreign travel. The FVAT Program includes systems used to provide\naccountability for, and to report to internal DOE management and external authorities on, the presence of foreign nationals at all DOE facilities, and on the official travel outside the United States for DOE Federal and contractor employees. Funding supports the operation and upgrade of the \nForeign Access Central Tracking and Foreign Travel Management database systems. Funding also \nprovides for the performance of annual assessments and updating of unclassified foreign visits and assignments, classified visits, and official foreign travel policies; management of DOE activities related to Department of State exchange visitor program requirements; and response to mandates \nfrom the Department of Homeland Security related to foreign visitor security and visa requirements.\nThe specialized security support activity also provides risk management, vulnerability assessment, \nand security system performance evaluations, verifications, and validations for identification and \nclarification of threats to departmental assets; and development of innovative concepts to mitigate \nemerging threats at the field location level. This program provides security input through the various phases of critical design review and line item construction projects and provides technical support to the Departmental elements regarding design, construction, and review of sensitive compartmented information facilities. The activity provides for consistent application of the Design Basis Threat \nPolicy implementation throughout the Department and consistency in curriculum development for \nvulnerability assessment training required for computer based assessment tools.\nFunding supports the implementation of the revised DOE standard vulnerability assessment process \nallowing the Department to accurately and equitably evaluate the security protection posture at the \nsite level and across the DOE complex, and develop and test necessary enhancements to security systems. Onsite participation and field assistance is provided for the development and review of Site Safeguard and Security Plans at the Department’s most critical facilities. Onsite support and field \nassistance also provides for independent, technical experts to ensure comprehensive, equitable, cost-\neffective security protection program evaluations and testing. This program supports Joint Tactical Simulation/Joint Conflict and Tactical Simulation modeling, force-on-force exercise expert adversary teams, facility security system and program characterization, threat clarification and identification, \nphysical security system reviews, and security surveys.\nFunding levels in FY 2005 and FY 2006 include $1.3 million for management of Cyber Forensics \nPage 39 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nactivities; however, management responsibility for this activity was transferred to the Office of the \nChief Information Officer in FY 2005.\n/squarecentHeadquarters Security ................................................ 34,248 22,186 25,324\nThis activity is comprised of a security protective force and operation of the countermeasures, \nalarms, and access control equipment and systems designed to provide protection of DOE Headquarters’ facilities and assets; and management of the DOE Continuity of Government facilities.\n•Protective Force and Operations ......................... . 24,050 22,017 25,155\nFunding provides for a security protective force of over 200 contract personnel engaged in the physical protection of DOE Headquarters classified information and facilities in the National Capital Area. Protection and physical access control is provided 24 hours a day, 365 days a year at the Forrestal and Germantown Buildings, and satellite facilities located in Washington, D.C.,\nand Germantown, Maryland, respect ively.\nHeadquarters operations consist of the Technical Surveillance Countermeasures Program and \nSecurity Alarms and Access Control System. The Technical Surveillance Countermeasures \nProgram provides detection and denial of hostile intelligence collection operations bent on \npenetrating Headquarters’ sensitive installations to steal technology or sensitive or classified information through technical surveys, inspections, in-conference monitors, and pre-constructionconsultation services as well as technical threat analysis for DOE Headquarters and DOE \ncontractor facilities in the greater Washington, D.C., area. Funding provides for the acquisition, \nmaintenance, and upgrade of unique countermeasures equipment. The Security Alarms and \nAccess Control System provides for the operation and maintenance of equipment and technology including security screening equipment, vehicle inspection scanning devices, low-light closed \ncircuit TV monitoring, and nuclear, biological and chemical detection devices; turnstiles; and \nother access control technologies. Funding supports various maintenance/upgrade contracts to ensure that the system operates in compliance with DOE security policy and operational requirements.\nFunding also provides for the development and distribution of security awareness materials (e.g., \nbrochures, posters, and books) used at Headquarters for initial, comprehensive, and annual security briefings.\n•Continuity of Government ................................... . 169 169 169\nThis activity provides for uninterrupted facility support to permit sustained national-level\noperations and departmental programmatic responsibilities during emergency situations. Funding \nprovides for operational support to facilitate departmental leadership/activities during an \nemergency event, including facility/office space, communications and infrastructure support.\n•DOE Emergency Operation Centers ................... . 10,029 0 0\nManagement responsibility for this activity was transferred to the National Nuclear Security\nAdministration in FY 2004. However, funding remained with SSA through FY 2005.\nPage 40 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nTechnology Development and Systems Deployment ....... 14,519 14,374 15,640\nThe Technology Development and Systems Deployment activity provides technology-based solutions to \nknown security vulnerabilities throughout the DOE complex. This activity provides technology–based\nsystems as an alternative to costly increases in manpower needed to implement the Design Basis Threat Policy; and provides technologies to counter threats for which no current defensive capability exists.The activity identifies and evaluates commercial technologies to ensure system performance is commensurate with operational security requirements before such technologies are purchased and \ndeployed to protect critical national assets. Funding provides for modifying existing technologies, \ndevelopment of new technologies, and deploying technologies to meet security requirements.\nFunding is used to addresses the broad spectrum of the Department’s security mission to include \nphysical security systems, protective force technologies and tactics, nuclear materials control and \naccountability, as well as nuclear, chemical, and biological defenses. The focus of this activity continuesto provide/deploy technical solutions in response to validated requirements identified through the Design Basis Threat Site Assistance Visit process conducted by SSA in fiscal year 2005. The primary security \ncapability areas to be addressed include: 1) early adversary detection through exterior sensors and \nairborne platforms with sensor payloads capable of scanning several kilometers beyond the fence line, and embedded sensors at the target location to instantaneously alarm to unauthorized tampering or movement of materials; 2) support of an elite response force through advanced weaponry, distributed \nsituational awareness, all-weather target acquisition optics, non-pyrotechnic breaching kits, and \nimproved survivability for response force fighting positions, vehicles and command centers; and3) denial and neutralization capabilities at the target to include robotic weapons, incapacitating technologies, or combinations thereof.\nFunding also supports efforts to protect DOE facilities, assets, and personnel from terrorist use of \nweapons of mass destruction (nuclear, biological, chemical and bulk explosives) in order to gain access to nuclear materials or disrupt DOE capabilities critical to national security. This is a multifaceted \ninitiative with sub-elements to address lethal chemical and explosives protection analysis at multiple \nnuclear facilities; site-specific deployment and placement of chemical agent detectors throughout the \ncomplex; deployment of lethal response capabilities impervious to weapons of mass destruction effects within special nuclear material storage locations; and technical support for implementation of nuclear, biological, and chemical protection technologies at critical security nodes such as central alarm stations \nand protective force response rooms.\nIncluded within this overall activity is funding for activities associated with the successful transition of \nsecurity technologies into Departmental operational facilities. Funding provides for the resolution of \nadministrative, safety, and legal issues, in a timely manner to avoid significant delays in fielding \neffective security technology solutions.\nClassification, Declassification, and Controlled \nInformation .......................................................................\n. 17,274 13,178 13,178\nThe Classification, Declassification, and Controlled Information activity ensures the Department meets \nPage 41 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nits statutory responsibility to implement the U.S. Government-wide program to classify and declassify \nnuclear weapons-related technology, i.e., Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data and to implement the requirements contained in Executive Order 12958 to classify other information that is \ncritical to the national security, i.e., National Security Information. This program also identifies \ninformation that is controlled under statute to protect national security, i.e., Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information, and other governmental, commercial, and private interests, i.e., Official Use Only.\nFunding is used to assist the Federal staff in the development and issuance of U.S. Government and \nDepartment-wide policy and technical guidance to ensure that classified nuclear weapons-relatedinformation and other information assets critical to national security and to other governmental, commercial, or private interests are identified for proper protection. Funding provides for the conduct of \nappraisals of DOE and other agencies’ operations to ensure that nuclear weapons-related classification \nand information control programs are adequate and effective; and for the development and conduct of training for DOE and other agency personnel in classification and information control programs and \nrelated areas.\nThis activity also funds the Guidance Streamlining Initiative, a program to improve the \nclassification/control guidance system by: 1) making guidance more accurate, clear, and accessible toguide writers and classifiers throughout the complex, and 2) maintaining the electronic Classification \nGuidance System, which contains all current and archived classification and control guidance used by \nmany classifiers and classification officers throughout the Department. Both of these programs contribute to the President’s Management Agenda electronic Government goals through increased use of new technologies to create advanced tools and resources.\nThe classification, declassification, and controlled information review activity provides for the review of \ndocuments scheduled for declassification, requested under statute or Executive Order, and in response to litigation or other requests, to ensure that classified and controlled information is identified and protected from unauthorized release to the public. These reviews are performed under the requirements of the \nAtomic Energy Act, Executive Order 12958, and Public Law 105-261 to prevent proliferation of \nweapons of mass destruction by ensuring that no classified or controlled information is inadvertently \nreleased. Funding also provides for development of automation technologies to improve the speed, accuracy, and cost of document reviews and to fully implement an online, electronic declassification \nsystem with improved process management, responsiveness, accuracy, and product quality, and reduced \nadministrative costs in line with the President’s electronic Government goals.\nProject Engineering and Design (Idaho) .........................\n. 0 4,950 0\nFY 2006 funding initiated a new construction project to upgrade buildings CPP-651 and CPP-691 at the \nIdaho National Laboratory for consolidation of the Department’s special nuclear material. SSA requests \nno funding for this activity in FY 2007.\nTotal, Nuclear Safeguards and Security ......................... .193,794 185,009 182,548\nPage 42 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Nuclear Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional BudgetExplanation of Funding Changes\nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006\n($000)\nOperational Support\n/squarecentSecurity Activities\nDecrease is a result of efficiency of operations within the Security support activity.. -927\n/squarecentSecurity and Safety Training\nFunding increase provides for the continued development and deployment of the \nSafety Career Development Program to include Safety Systems Oversight, Senior \nTechnical Safety Manager’s, and Safety Professional Development Program courses in support of Presidential and Departmental human capital strategies and \nSecretarial Security Initiatives. ................................................................................... +723\n/squarecentNuclear Materials Accountability\nFunding increase provides for infrastructure improvement at the New Brunswick \nLaboratory and upgrades to the Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards \nSystem, Local Area Nuclear Material Accountability Software, and funding transfer \nfrom DOE’s Office of Environmental Management for the Radioactive Source \nRegistry Tracking database ......................................................................................... +944\n/squarecentSpecialized Security Support\nFunding decrease is due to a shifting of funds from this subactivity to the \nHeadquarters Security and Technology Development and Systems Deployment \nsubactivities; and the transferring of the Cyber Forensics Laboratory from SSA to \nthe Office of the Chief Information Officer. Management responsibility for this activity was transferred in FY 2005............................................................................ -2,655\n/squarecentHeadquarters Security\n•Protective Force and Operations\nIncrease provides for salary increases as required by the Protective Force contract and the shifting of funds from the Specialized Security Support activity \nfor the development and distribution of security awareness materials (e.g., \nbrochures, posters, and books) used at Headquarters for initial, comprehensive, \nand annual security briefings. ............................................................................... +3,138\nTotal, Operational Support ............................................................................................ +1,223\nTechnology Development and Systems Deployment\nIncrease is due to the shifting of funds from the Specialized Security Support activity in \norder to combine similar activities. ................................................................................... +1,266\nProject Engineering and Design (Idaho)\nFY 2006 funding initiated a new construction project to upgrade buildings CPP-651\nand CPP-691 at the Idaho National Laboratory for consolidation of the Department’s special nuclear material. SSA requests no funding for this activity in FY 2007.............. -4,950\nTotal Funding Change, Nuclear Safeguards and Security .......................................... -2,461\nPage 43 Page 44 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Security Investigations FY 2007 Congressional BudgetSecurity Investigations\nFunding Schedule by Activity\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006aFY 2007\nSecurity Investigations\nFederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) ......................................................... 1,865 2,214 978\nOffice of Personnel Management ( OPM)..................................................... 38,160 39,217 33,374\nRelated Security Investigations Activities .................................................... 4,536 4,827 5,648\nTotal, Security Investigations .............................................................................. 44,561 46,258 40,000\nCase Projections\n(number of cases)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Case Change % Change\nFederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)\nInitial Background Investigations ................... . 100 48 48 0 -0.0%\nReinvestigations .............................................. . 539 708 273 -435 -61.4%\nTotal, FBI Investigations ...................................... . 639 756 321 -435 -57.5%\nOffice of Personnel Management (OPM)\nInitial Background Invest igations ................... . 5,736 5,818 5,863 +45 +0.8%\nReinvestigations .............................................. . 9,103 8,880 5,630 -3,250 -36.6%\nNational Agency Checks................................. . 4,455 5,400 4,543 -857 -15.9%\nTotal, OPM Investigations .................................... .19,294 20,098 16,036 -4,062 -20.2%\nTotal, Case Projections ......................................... .19,933 20,854 16,357 -4,497 -21.6%\nDescription\nThe Security Investigations subprogram manages funding for security background investigations \nassociated with providing access authorization to DOE Federal and contract personnel who, in the performance of their official duties, require access to classified information or certain quantities of special nuclear material. Background investigations are required by Section 145 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and Executive Order 12968. The investigations are performed and access \nauthorizations granted based on Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 710, Criteria and \nProcedures for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Matter or Special Nuclear Material .\nThis subprogram also manages the Accelerated Access Authorization Program, used to provide interim \n“Q” access authorizations; and manages and operates security access authorization information systems \nand associated information control systems used to manage access authorizations throughout DOE.\na Reflects a reduction of $467,000 for the 1% rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental \nAppropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006.\nPage 45 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Security Investigations FY 2007 Congressional BudgetThe Program Goals of the Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the (GPRA Unit) programs but with additional efforts from subprograms which support the GPRA Units in carrying out their mission. Security Investigations performs the \nfollowing functions in support of the overall mission of the Office of Security and Safety Performance \nAssurance.\nBenefits\nThis subprogram provides for the centralized management of access control authorizations (clearances)\nthat allow employees and contractors access to sensitive information, facilities, and material entrusted to DOE thus ensuring national security. Background investigations are performed in accordance with DOEOrder 470.4, Safeguards and Security Program, August 26, 2005, which replaced DOE Order 472.1C \nPersonnel Security Activities, March 25, 2003, by either the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the \nOffice of Personnel Management, as required by law or Departmental regulations. The Accelerated \nAccess Authorization Program provides a method for granting qualifying new DOE employees and \ncontractors interim “Q” access authorizations within 21 days while the 150 to 300-day background \ninvestigation is completed. This allows new hires to begin productive work while affording additional \nassurances that the national security is being safeguarded. The management of access authorization data is performed in a cost effective, efficient, manner via the use of electronic databases and Internet capable tools that comprise the electronic DOE Integrated Security System (e-DISS+). These electronic tools\nsupport and track the adjudication process from the beginning to the disposition of the access \nauthorization request.\nProgram Funding Distribution Table\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change\nEstimated Program Distribution\nNational Nuclear Security Administration........... 26,681 27,676 21,174 -6,502 -23.5%\nDefense Environmental Management .................. 6,684 5,627 5,476 -151 -2.7%\nScience................................................................. 2,693 3,219 3,194 -25 -0.8%\nSecurity................................................................ 7,419 8,520 8,979 +459 +5.4%\nNuclear Energy .................................................... 1,084 1,216 1,177 -39 -3.2%\nTotal, Security Investigations .................................... 44,561 46,258 40,000 -6,258 -13.5%\nDetailed Justification\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nFederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) ................................ 1,865 2,214 978\nThe FBI conducts background investigations for DOE Federal and contractor personnel for positions of \nhigh degree of importance or sensitivity dictated by the National Defense Authorization Act and DOE \nOrder 470.4, Safeguards and Security Program . Funding provides for 48 initial background \nPage 46 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Security Investigations FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\ninvestigations, 273 periodic reinvestigations, and reimbursement for fingerprint and name checks.\nOffice of Personnel Management (OPM) ............................ 38,160 39,217 33,374\nOPM conducts the majority of background investigations for DOE Federal personnel and contractors.\nFunding provides for 5,863 initial Single Scope Background Investigations and 5,630 periodic \nreinvestigations. Funding provides for 4,543 initial and reinvestigation National Agency Checks.\nRelated Security Investigations Activities ........................... 4,536 4,827 5,648\n/squarecentAccess Authorization Information Management ........ 3,336 3,336 3,336\nThis activity provides for the management of all aspects of access authorization data. The process o f \ninvestigating, granting, and subsequent management and tracking of access authorizations is data \nintensive and requires the maintenance of large amounts of data for long periods of time, both for \npersonnel who are granted access authorizations and for those who are not. The primary system for performing this function is the electronic DOE Integrated Security System (e-DISS+), which \nconsists of a series of interrelated electronic databases and associated client applications and web \npages that automate the processing and tracking of access authorization requests and integrate the \naccess control process. An automated Applicant User Interface allows applicants to complete and submit their Questionnaire for National Security Positions (Standard Form-86) over a secure web-\nbased system. The Personnel Security Interface facilitates the collection of SF-86 data for review \nand allows DOE security personnel to receive, process, review, and submit the information to OPM.This process greatly reduces the amount of time spent on managing and preserving the integrity of the data as the information flows between physical locations and organizations. The e-DISS+ also \nincludes the Central Personnel Clearance Index database that maintains access authorization data at \nthe site and national level. The Visitor Access Database and Classified Visitor Control System \ncontain data in centralized databases for nationwide access by DOE personnel and contractors concerning access authorizations and inter-site visits for use in providing access to facilities and \ninformation. The e-DISS+ supports the President’s Management Agenda in the electronic \nGovernment initiative, but does not duplicate the e-Clearance authorization initiative managed by OPM. Funding provides for the continued operation and maintenance, as well as modest upgrades in the functionality of these systems, and for the maintenance of system user information.\n/squarecentAccelerated Access Authorization Program (AAAP) .. 1,200 1,491 2,312\nThe Accelerated Access Authorization Program (AAAP) provides a mechanism for granting\nqualified new DOE (and Department of the Navy, via a Memorandum of Understanding) employees \nand contractors interim “Q” access authorizations while the required Single Scope Background \nInvestigations are completed. This program allows new hires to begin productive work within 21 \ndays rather than waiting the 150 to 300 days for the Single Scope Background Investigations to be completed while affording assurance that national security is safeguarded. AAAP applicants \nvoluntarily undergo a series of tests, including a drug screen, a psychological assessment, and a \npolygraph examination, in addition to a review of the applicants SF-86 and a National Agency \nCheck with Credit. The AAAP does not replace the Single Scope Background Investigations;investigations continue even after the interim access authorization is granted. Funding provides for operating costs, maintaining the information derived from the tests, and maintaining and operating \nPage 47 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Security Investigations FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nthe facilities in Albuquerque, NM, and Oak Ridge, TN, where the testing is conducted.\nTotal, Security Investigations .............................................. 44,561 46,258 40,000\nExplanation of Funding Changes\nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006\n($000)\nFederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)\nFunding level reflects a projected decrease of initial background cases to be investigated \nby FBI based on an analysis of information provided by field locations and historical data regarding the number and type of positions to be filled in FY 2007 requiring access \nauthorizations. Funding level also reflects the projected decrease of 5-year cycle \nreinvestigations due to the FBI’s backlog of cases resulting from the terrorist attacks on the United States in FY 2001................................................................................................ -1, 236\nOffice of Personnel Management (OPM)\nFunding level reflects a projected decrease of initial background cases to be investigated \nby OPM based on an analysis of information provided by field locations and historical \ndata regarding the number and type of positions to be filled in FY 2007 requiring access authorizations. Funding level also reflects a projected decrease of 5-year cycle reinvestigations due to OPM’s backlog of cases resulting from the terrorist attacks on the \nUnited States in FY 2001. ..................................................................................................... -5,843\nRelated Security Investigations Activities\n/squarecentAccelerated Access Authorization Program (AAAP)\nFunding level reflects the projected increase use of the AAAP by DOE programs \nbased on current trends regarding the number of positions to be filled in FY 2007 that \nrequire access authorizations. ......................................................................................... +821\nTotal Funding Change, Security Investigations ............................................................... -6,258\nPage 48 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional BudgetProgram Direction\nFunding Profile by Category\n(dollars in thousands/whole FTEs)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nNew Brunswick Laboratory\nSalaries and Benefits ................................................................................... . 3,821 4,108 4,305\nTravel .......................................................................................................... . 71 71 73\nSupport Services .......................................................................................... . 143 0 0\nOther Related Expenses .............................................................................. . 1,556 1,699 1,735\nTotal, New Brunswick Laboratory ..................................................................... . 5,591 5,878 6,113\nFull Time Equivalents ........................................................................................ . 40 40 40\nNNSA Service Center\nSupport Services ......................................................................................... . 311 311 311\nTotal, NNSA Service Center .............................................................................. . 311 311 311\nFull Time Equivalents ........................................................................................ . 00 0\nPacific Northwest National Laboratory\nSupport Services .......................................................................................... . 250 250 250\nTotal, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory .................................................... . 250 250 250\nFull Time Equivalents ........................................................................................ . 00 0\nHeadquarters\nSalaries and Benefits ................................................................................... . 42,073a35,481 37,372\nTravel .......................................................................................................... . 2,496 2,362 2,615\nSupport Services .......................................................................................... . 18,041 18,110 18,050\nOther Related Expenses .............................................................................. . 13,473 10,365c11,238\nTotal, Headquarters ............................................................................................ . 76,083a66,318c69,275\nFull Time Equivalents ........................................................................................ . 325b273 268\na FY 2005 includes $4,579,000 used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers and the Threat \nAssessment function. These activities were transferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\nb FY 2005 includes 27 FTE used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers and the Threat \nAssessment function. These activities were transferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\ncReflects reduction of $735,000 for the 1% rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental \nAppropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006.\nPage 49 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands/whole FTEs)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nTotal, Program Direction\nSalaries and Benefits................................................................................... . 45,894a39,589 41,677\nTravel .......................................................................................................... . 2,567 2,433 2,688\nSupport Services ......................................................................................... . 18,745 18,671 18,611\nOther Related Expenses.............................................................................. . 15,029 12,064c12,973\nTotal, Program Direction ................................................................................... . 82,235a72,757c75,949\nTotal, Full T ime Equivalents .............................................................................. . 365b313 308\nMission\nProgram Direction provides the Federal staffing, support services, and other resources and associated \ncosts required to provide overall direction and execution of the Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance (SSA). This subprogram also provides for the administrative support to the Office of the Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.\nAs stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission. SSA performs critical functions \nwhich directly support the mission of the Department. These functions include:\n/squarecentdeveloping and promulgating clear and consistent security strategies and policies governing the \nprotection of national security and other critical assets entrusted to the Department;\n/squarecentdeveloping and providing standardized, comprehensive security, and safety training throughout the Department;\n/squarecentmanaging the Department’s protective force for DOE facilities in the National Capital Area, including DOE’s Continuity of Government facilities and plans;\n/squarecentproviding executive protective services for the Department;\n/squarecentmanaging the development and deployment of security technologies;\n/squarecentdeveloping and implementing Department-wide nuclear and radiological materials tracking and accounting programs;\n/squarecentassisting other governmental and departmental organizations in the mission of accounting for and assuring the security of nuclear material throughout the world;\n/squarecentmanaging the Department’s security investigations budget and personnel security programs associated with providing access authorizations to DOE Federal and contract personnel;\na FY 2005 includes $4,579,000 used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers and the Threat \nAssessment function. Funding will be transferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\nb FY 2005 includes 27 FTE used to support the activities of the DOE Emergency Operations Centers and the Threat \nAssessment function. These activities were transferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration in FY 2006.\ncReflects reduction of $735,000 for the 1% rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental \nAppropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006.\nPage 50 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget/squarecent\nmanaging the U.S. Government-wide program to classify and declassify nuclear weapons-related\ntechnology and implementing the requirements of Executive Order 12958 regarding the \nclassification and declassification of information that is vital to national security;\n/squarecentassisting Departmental and other U.S. Governmental organizations in providing adequate protection \nto national security assets;\n/squarecentproviding specialized security support services to the Department associated with the development and dissemination of security awareness information; maintenance of various security-related data \nbase systems; management of the foreign ownership, control, or influence and foreign visits, \nassignments, and travel programs; and conduct of vulnerability assessments in support of the \nimplementation of the Design Basis Threat Policy;\n/squarecentconducting performance appraisals to verify that the Department’s security interests are protected; \nthe Department can effectively respond to emergencies; and site workers, the public, and the \nenvironment are protected from hazardous operations and materials; and,\n/squarecentproviding support for centralized leadership in resolving Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board \nissues.\nDetailed Justification\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nSalaries and Benefits ........................................................... 45,894 39,589 41,677\nSalaries and benefits for FY 2007 provide for 308 Federal full-time equivalents (FTEs) with the technical expertise needed to carry out the essential SSA mission. The Federal staffing level is derived \nfrom the combined staffing from the New Brunswick Laboratory (NBL) (40), Office of the Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (5), and the remainder of SSA (263). Based on a workforce analysis and skills evaluation performed by SSA, it was determined \nthat there will be a reduction of 25 FTEs in FY 2006. This reduction is also due to streamlining the \nefficiency of operations following the formation of SSA in December 2003, the significant program and organizational restructuring and realignments completed in April 2004, and a transfer of 1 FTE to the Office of the Chief Information Officer associated with the Cyber Forensics Laboratory. In FY 2007, \n4 FTEs will be transferred to the National Nuclear Safety Administration for the North Atlantic Treaty \nOrganization and Continuity of Operations activities. Salaries and benefit estimates are based on the economic assumptions provided by the Office of Management and Budget. Funding for full-timepermanent employees includes salaries and other personnel benefits, such as cash incentive awards, \nlump sum payments, Senior Executive Service and other performance awards, and worker’s \ncompensation, and provides for the skills and expertise required to carry out the mission of SSA.\nFederal employees (40 FTEs) are also located at NBL in Argonne, IL. NBL serves as the central \nauthority for nuclear material safeguards measurements and measurement evaluations and is the U.S. \nGovernment’s certifying authority for nuclear reference materials. NBL provides certified reference \nmaterials and maintains accurate standards and comprehensive procedures to ensure DOE’s nuclear materials accounts are based on defensible measured values; reducing costs associated with investigating discrepancies and supporting treaty compliance. NBL personnel support DOE and other U.S. \nGovernment Agencies and Departments in global nonproliferation efforts by participating in the \nPage 51 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\ndevelopment and implementation of international nuclear material accountability methods and \nprograms; and assisting in verification of nuclear material nonproliferation program activities. An A-76Competitive Sourcing study of NBL was initiated in FY 2005. The results of the study will be \nannounced in March 2006.\nFederal personnel at Headquarters (268 FTEs) perform the independent oversight mission, support the \nDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board liaison functions, and serve as the operational element for \nsecurity policy, technology deployment, executive protection, and Headquarters security. Activities \ninclude the security training mission at the National Training Center in Albuquerque, NM; plutonium, uranium, and special material control and accountability; classification and declassification operations; tracking of foreign national visits, assignments and travel; Headquarters security operations; executive \nprotection operations; security investigations; Department-wide security policy, to include the \ndevelopment and issuance of security directives for the Department; and DOE Continuity of Government programs. Staff members also serve on interagency working groups and task forces in the \ndevelopment of U.S. Government-wide security policy in the form of Executive Orders, National \nSecurity and Homeland Security Presidential Decisions, Directives, and other policy issuances.\nTravel ................................................................................... 2,567 2,433 2,688\nTravel includes all costs of transportation, subsistence, and incidental travel expenses incurred by SSA \nFederal employees in accordance with Federal Travel Regulations. SSA domestic and foreign trips are \nnecessary to conduct essential security activities. These activities include national security assistance, \nand interface with field offices, laboratories, and local, state, and foreign governments. Additionally, extensive travel is required for SSA personnel to perform executive protection activities for the Secretary, and other dignitaries as assigned, and to accomplish the independent oversight mission, conducting evaluations across the DOE complex.\nSupport Services ................................................................. 18,745 18,671 18,611\nSSA has analyzed its use of support services and has established specific criteria for its efficient use.\nWhile SSA has some unique national-level experts, technical contractual services continue to be more practical and cost-effective. The evolving need for national-level expertise in a multitude of disciplines\ncan best be met through the use of contractors who can rapidly respond to the continually changing skill \nmix required to perform security and independent oversight activities across the DOE complex.Contractor support provides a practical and cost-effective method of providing a surge pool of personnel with technical expertise in a wide range of safety and security disciplines. Support services are utilized \nas follows.\n/squarecentSecurity Activities ......................................................... 6,012 5,530 4,365\nSecurity support services utilize highly specialized technical and analytical expertise and \nmanagement support personnel essential to its mission success. In support of the overall DOE \nsecurity mission of protecting the U.S. nuclear deterrence capabilities from a spectrum of diverse \nthreats, this activity develops and promulgates clear and consistent security strategies and policy governing the protection of national security and other critical assets entrusted to the Department.\nPage 52 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nMission areas include: 1) nuclear safeguards and security, which includes the National Training \nCenter, nuclear materials accountability, information security, Headquarters security, specialized security support, foreign visits, assignments and travel, security policy, and classification / \ndeclassification; 2) security investigations; and 3) program-specific staffing resources to support the \nprotection of Headquarters assets.\n/squarecentIndependent Oversight Activities ................................ 12,116 12,575 13,596\nIndependent oversight activities of security, cyber security, emergency management, and \nenvironment, safety, and health programs throughout the Department directly relate to DOE national \nsecurity strategic and general goals. Independent oversight appraisals are conducted to verify that the Department’s security interests are protected, that the Department can effectively respond to emergencies, and that site workers, the public, and the environment are protected from hazardous \noperations and materials. These appraisals provide accurate, comprehensive information and \nanalysis regarding the effectiveness, vulnerabilities, and trends of the Department’s security; cyber security; emergency management; environment, safety, and health programs; and other critical functions of interest to the Department Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, the Under Secretary, the \nAdministrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, Congressional committees, and othe\nr \nstakeholders, such as the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.\nAs required by DOE Order 470.2B, Independent Oversight and Performance Assurance Program ,\ndated October 21, 2002, the independent appraisal function is performed by personnel \norganizationally independent of the DOE offices that develop and implement policies and programs and, therefore, can objectively observe and report on these policies and programs as they relate to \ndepartmental operations. These appraisals complement but do not replace DOE line management’s responsibility for security and safety program oversight and self-assessments, as required by \nintegrated security management and integrated safety management systems implemented throughout \nthe Department. The appraisal processes utilized are governed by documented, formal protocols addressing all phases of appraisal activities. These processes are also conducive to changing conditions and the needs of the Department.\nAdditionally, SSA continues to be actively involved in the development of Department-level\ndirectives that establish overarching principles for oversight and identify DOE oversight activities that involve assessing Federal and contractor performance. These directives are closely linked to the \nDepartment’s response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1,\nOversight of Complex High-Hazard Nuclear Operations.\nFunding provides for contracted national-level experts to complement the Federal staff, to \nimplement the appraisal process, which emphasizes performance testing. Appraisal personnel \nobserve operations and conduct performance tests to validate the effectiveness of safety and security programs and policies. Reports are developed documenting the assessment activities conducted, the \nresults of those assessments, and opportunities for improvement or findings. Unclassified appraisal \nreports and classified appraisal report titles are maintained on the SSA web site in order to share the \ninformation throughout the Department. Classified reports are maintained in a document control \nPage 53 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\ncenter and are available to authorized personnel upon request. The final products of the appraisal \nprocess are corrective action plans, as required. The corrective action plans are developed by the programs under review and are reviewed and commented on by SSA staff to ensure proposed \ncorrective actions adequately address findings and other issues; and promote the protection of \nsecurity interests, workers, the public, and the environment.\nEvents and activities that have an impact on security and safety are proactively evaluated and \nevaluation methods and procedures are continuously revised and refined to better evaluate the \nprincipal elements of the independent oversight program.\n•Security Appraisals ................................................. 5,849 6,033 6,625\nSecurity appraisals are conducted at DOE (primarily, National Nuclear Security Administration) \nsites that have significant amounts of special nuclear material, classified information, or other \nsecurity interests. The scope of the appraisals include: physical protection of special nuclear material, accountability of special nuclear material, protection of classified and sensitive information, personnel security, protective forces, foreign visits and assignments, and protection \nprogram management. Performance tests are conducted using weapons simulation systems to \nperform realistic tactical security engagements between a specially trained composite adversaryforce and the inspected site protection force to assess overall security performance effectiveness (e.g., force-on-force exercises). These reviews have directly contributed to significant reductions \nin the recurrence of security issues, and effectively support the maintenance of a safe, secure, and \nreliable weapons stockpile. As a direct result of the experiences and expertise developed, tools and information (e.g., handbooks, videotapes, and lessons learned) have been shared with numerous organizations within the Department.\nSSA’s current safeguard and security independent oversight activities have been shaped by \nevents over the recent past regarding use and management of controlled removable electronic media, revision to the Design Basis Threat Policy, and advancement of DOE Secretarial initiatives. The effect of these events will be reflected in security independent oversight \nactivities over the next several fiscal years. SSA continues to review implemented procedures \nand processes for controlling accountable controlled removable electronic media and conducts site visits to assist in developing resource-efficient, sustainable protection strategies to support timely implementation of the revised Design Basis Threat Policy. SSA will conduct more \nfrequent evaluations and testing of sites with significant holdings of special nuclear materials, \nnuclear weapons, and sensitive information facilities. SSA will also increase the number of force-on-force performance tests from 4 to 5 per year. Training for the Composite Adversarial Team that acts as the opposing force during force-on-force exercises will continue semi-\nannually. Additionally, SSA will conduct special reviews and analyses to assess the \neffectiveness of site Design Basis Threat Policy implementation plans. Insights on DOE security program strengths and weaknesses gained as a result of independent oversight activities will be published in lessons learned reports for distribution to security and senior departmental \nmanagement.\nPage 54 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\n•Cyber Security Appraisals ..................................... 967 1,242 1,671\nCyber security evaluations provide assurance that the confidentiality, integrity, and availability \nof DOE classified and unclassified information systems are protected through multi-facetted\nevaluations of cyber security program performance, including regular announced inspections, \nunannounced testing, continuous scanning of the DOE Internet perimeter, and other special reviews. Internal and external network penetration testing is conducted in support of inspection activities in order to fully understand a site’s cyber security protection posture. Penetration \ntesting focuses on identifying network vulnerabilities that could be exploited, evaluating the \neffectiveness of firewalls, evaluating intrusion detection and system monitoring capabilities, and evaluating other aspects of network security. Cyber security assessments require the maintenance of a state-of-the-art cyber security testing network for external testing and a suite of \ndeployable cyber security testing equipment for internal testing of DOE site networks. Cyber \nsecurity independent oversight activities also include programmatic reviews to evaluate essential management processes that are critical to an effective cyber security program. These reviews assess the direction and sustainability of the program as well as to identify any underlying causes \nfor weaknesses that are discovered during penetration testing.\nSSA’s current cyber security independent oversight activities have been shaped by focus on \ncompliance with Federal Information Security Management Act requirements, advancement of \nDOE Secretarial security initiatives, and protection of DOE information systems against ever \nincreasing threats. The effect of these events will be reflected in cyber security independentoversight activities over the next several fiscal years. SSA is responsible for conducting the annual evaluation of classified information systems security program, as required by Federal Information Security Management Act, for both DOE and the Office of Intelligence. SSA also \nprovides critical input to the DOE Office of Inspector General on the annual evaluation of \nunclassified information systems security program. There are a number of Federal Information Security Management Act focus areas, such as certification and accreditation, which continue to influence the scope of SSA cyber security inspections. In May 2004, the Secretary announced a \nseries of initiatives to improve DOE security including one initiative focused on SSA cyber \nsecurity testing activities that mandates an active unannounced penetration testing program for the Department, continuous scanning of the DOE network perimeter, and enhanced testing of DOE classified networks. Finally, SSA continues to focus on protection of DOE information\nsystems across the breadth of the Department to ensure that the confidentiality, integrity, and \navailability of important systems are appropriately protected. This includes cyber security assessments of critical infrastructure, national security, science, environmental protection, and other departmental sites.\n•Emergency Management Appraisals .................... 800 800 800\nAppraisals of critical emergency management operations are conducted at DOE Headquarters \nand DOE field sites having significant amounts of special nuclear material or other hazardous \nmaterials and/or operations. These appraisals evaluate the effectiveness of all aspects of \nemergency management programs, including hazards assessment, protective actions, emergency \nPage 55 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nresponse, emergency public information, and offsite interfaces by conducting limited scope \nperformance tests and evaluating full-participation exercises at the inspected sites. Additionally, reviews of crosscutting emergency management topics of increased concern in the heightened \nterrorist threat environment are performed. Appraisal results have significantly contributed to \nimprovements in emergency management readiness and response at individual sites, within program and field offices, and across the DOE complex.\nIndependent oversight of departmental emergency management program activities has been \nexpanding to include a broader spectrum of reviews in consideration of the post 9/11 threat environment and the implications of the revised Design Basis Threat Policy. At the site implementation level, new emergency management reviews will be conducted jointly with \nsecurity force-on-force evaluations to test integrated incident command in response to \nmalevolent acts, including response to the release of hazardous materials. Joint reviews of siteenvironment, safety, and health programs will also be conducted to ensure they effectively \nsupport emergency response. Cross-cutting special reviews will be expanded to evaluate \ncapabilities required to meet the new directives for the National Response Plan and the National \nIncident Management System. New reviews will be conducted to assess the Department’s national response assets capabilities in support of potential or actual radiological materials releases. In partnership with line program management, lessons learned site visits will be conducted to share knowledge of effective program implementation practices, and to share \nindependent oversight feedback to the Emergency Operations Training Academy to foster \ncorporate-wide improvement.\n•Environment, Safety and Health Appraisals ........ 4,000 4,000 4,000\nEnvironment, safety, and health (ES&H) evaluations focus on Integrated Safety Management \nimplementation; ES&H performance; and relevant ES&H topics such as radiation protection, \ncriticality safety, industrial hygiene, and occupational medicine. Integrated Safety Management reviews focus on management systems such as self-assessments, lessons learned, deficiency tracking, root cause analysis, and reporting of compliance deficiencies and events. Periodic \nindependent oversight is also performed of ES&H performance during all phases of major \nprojects, such as construction, recovery, and stabilization of hazardous materials, decommissioning, and environmental restoration. Environmental portions of inspections provideindependent evaluations of a wide variety of environmental protection and restoration activities, \nincluding the effectiveness of environmental programs in accordance with Executive Orders.\nReviews are conducted of selected areas of current interest (i.e., focus areas), such as compliance with the implementation of environmental management systems, corrective action management, and safety system oversight. Also, reviews are conducted of selected essential systems to ensure \nthat they can perform their safety functions. As a result, these evaluations provide a significant \nbenefit to the Department by improving safety and promoting adherence to applicable Federal and State regulations and DOE and industry standards in such areas as safety and health, radiation protection, waste management, and fire protection.\nES&H evaluations have evolved over the past several years to focus on persistent \nPage 56 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nimplementation problems within DOE. This process has proven to be an effective diagnostic \ntool to quickly and efficiently identify weaknesses in Integrated Safety Management, and provides a means to ensure timely and effective corrective actions are implemented. SSA \ncurrently performs 6 ES&H evaluations each year, focusing on high hazard nuclear, and non-\nnuclear radiological and industrial facilities. The goal is to perform an evaluation at each of these facilities every 2 to 3 years. Lower hazard facilities will be evaluated as resources permit or events dictate. Sites with recurring weaknesses, high rates of accidents and injuries, or other \nspecial considerations may be reviewed more frequently. In addition to the safety evaluations, \nSSA will conduct more focused reviews of special topic areas, such as safety system oversight,lockout-tagout, chronic beryllium disease prevention, and environmental management. These \nreviews may be conducted separately or incorporated into ES&H evaluations. Results from \nES&H evaluations and focused reviews will be summarized annually in a lessons learned report \nto safety and senior Department managers. In addition, special investigations maybe conducted to address as directed by the Secretary in important areas such as worker safety and health.\n•Special Reviews ....................................................... 500 500 500\nSpecial reviews and studies are performed of policies, programs, and their implementation in the \nfield to identify program corrections. These special reviews are often conducted in addition to regularly scheduled appraisal activities at the request of the Secretary and other senior departmental managers to examine issues derived from current events, e.g., the recent \ndepartmental stand-down of all operations involving accountable classified removable electronic \nmedia; and implementation of the revised Design Basis Threat Policy. In addition, special \nreview activities include reviews of issues not normally covered by ongoing independent oversight functions (i.e., security, cyber security, emergency management, and ES&H), e.g., \nInvestigation of Worker Exposures and Medical Services at the Hanford Site and River \nProtection Project; and Limited Scope Small Business Review. Finally, special reviews of crosscutting subjects, such as protective force, lock and key control, internet connectivity, chemical / biological agent use, and hoisting and rigging programs, are developed from site-specific investigations to provide DOE senior management an overview of programs and \nassociated issues across the entire Department.\nThe results of these special reviews and studies have been of particular interest to senior DOE \nmanagers and Congress, and their evaluation and analysis has resulted in substantial \nimprovements to programs throughout DOE.\n/squarecentDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Liaison \nActivities ........................................................................ 617 566 650\nDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) liaison activities are reported directly to the \nDeputy Secretary via the Office of the Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear \nFacilities Safety Board (DR), with administrative support provided by SSA. DR performs critical functions that directly support the mission of the Department, including providing leadership in resolving DNFSB-related technical and management issues necessary to ensure public health and \nsafety. This activity facilitates the Department’s compliance with Congressional mandates for the \nPage 57 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nDepartment: 1) to respond to DNFSB safety recommendations and resolve agreed-upon safety \nissues; 2) to provide requested reports on nuclear safety issues; 3) to fully cooperate with the DNFSB; and 4) to provide ready access to such facilities, personnel, and information as the DNFSB \nconsiders necessary to carry out its responsibilities. This includes technical evaluation and analysis \nof DNFSB safety and management issues providing direction and advice to line managers on addressing and resolving DNFSB issues, monitoring Department-wide performance in addressing and resolving DNFSB issues, and taking action to ensure the adequacy of DOE-wide performance.\nAdditional activities include preparing the statutorily required Annual Report to Congress on \nDNFSB activities; maintaining and improving the Department’s Safety Issues Management Systemsfor DNFSB-related issues, commitments, and actions; providing monthly and quarterly analysis \nreports to senior DOE officials on the status of existing commitments to identify those that require \nadditional management attention or action; and maintaining a web site that serves as the Department’s central repository of official DNFSB communications, making this information \navailable to the public and to Department and contractor personnel complex-wide.\nThis activity also provides program guidance for Department-wide implementation of the \nDepartment’s Facility Representative Program. This program includes approximately 200 DOE Facility Representatives who provide operational oversight at hazardous facilities at over 250 sites.Activities include participating in site reviews, updating program guidance and requirements, \nreporting on performance, and hosting an annual workshop.\nThis activity prepares the statutorily required Annual Report to Congress on DNFSB activities. The \nreport includes statutory notification of any implementation plans requiring more than 1 year to \ncomplete. DR prepares transmittal packages for all draft DOE rules, directives, and standards that \nfall within the DNFSB statutory authority for review and approval, and reviews DNFSB comments on DOE safety directives and resolves these comments with the responsible line managers so that final DOE rules, directives, and standards can be issued.\nDR thoroughly reviews incoming DNFSB correspondence and outgoing DOE correspondence to \nidentify safety and management issues that must be addressed by the Department. DR identifies and supports DOE line managers and technical experts in evaluating identified safety and management\nissues, determines corrective actions to resolve them, and provides direction and final review of the \nadequacy of corrective actions to resolve identified DNFSB safety and management issues.\nDR maintains and improves the Department’s SIMS database for DNFSB-related issues, \ncommitments, and actions. This system currently contains over 500 active Department \ncommitments and actions related to DNFSB recommendations, reporting requirements, and other correspondence. On behalf of the Secretary, DR identifies the existence of DOE commitments to the DNFSB for inclusion in this database and obtains descriptive status of commitments on a monthly basis. DR provides monthly and quarterly analysis reports to senior DOE officials on the status of \nexisting commitments to identify those that require additional management attention or action. The \nSafety Issues Management Systems database is password-protected and Internet-accessible from \nPage 58 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007\nthroughout the Department. Funding also provides for the maintenance of and improvements to \npublic web sites on DOE/DNFSB correspondence and safety issues. The main web site includes the Department’s central repository of official DNFSB communications and makes this information \navailable to the public and to Department and contractor personnel complex-wide. Annually, 250 to \n350 pieces of DNFSB/DOE correspondence are received and made available Department-wide via the Internet. Over 4,000 documents are currently available on the web site in multiple file formats for user convenience. Documents are posted in 1 to 3 business days to facilitate prompt, effective \nresponses and corrective action. The web site also provides DNFSB points-of-contact, DOE \ninterface protocols and direction, and useful information about the DNFSB. Funding also provides for the Facility Representative web site with associated technical knowledge base and training aids.\nOther Related Expenses .....................................................\n. 15,029 12,064 12,973\nOther Related Expenses provides support required for Federal and contractor staff to accomplish the \nSSA mission. Support includes the acquisition of security support and communications equipment, Secretarial mandated information technology support, Extended Common Integrated Technology Environment, Working Capital Fund services, and training for Federal employees. The specific security \nsupport and communications purchases for SSA include the purchase of protective gear, weapons, and \ncommunication devices.\nThe Extended Common Integrated Technology Environment initiative gathers the common information\ntechnology services that were previously managed separately, and turns the management and oversight \nof these services into one large-scale effort. The initiative is designed to be a one-stop-shop for all common information technology system and service that brings security, service, efficiency, and scale to these projects. The information technology investments support the Federal staff at Headquarters by providing support and maintenance of hardware, software, hotline, and other desktop maintenance.\nInformation technology hardware, connectivity, and support costs are based on a seat count and level of \nservice requested by SSA.\nThe maintenance of information technology systems exclusive to SSA is also part of this budget. The \nClassified Local Area Network is part of the consolidated infrastructure initiative. It includes a Secret \nRestricted Data network that supports SSA Headquarters users. The Secret Internet Protocol Router Network is part of the consolidated infrastructure initiative. It provides access to the Department of Defense classified network to effect coordination between the Departments.\nOther Related Expenses also provides funding for the Working Capital Fund based on guideline \nestimates issued by the Working Capital Fund Manager. The Working Capital Fund was established in FY 1997 to allocate the cost of common administrative services to the recipient organizations; it covers \nbuilding occupancy and alterations, computer and telephone infrastructure and usage, mail service, \ncopying, printing and graphics, procurement closeouts, supplies, online learning, computer network support, and payroll processing. Funding also provides training for Federal staff (including tuition costs \nfor Federal employees) to maintain the skill base required by the position.\nTotal Program Direction .................................................... 82,235 72,757 75,949\nPage 59 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional BudgetExplanation of Funding Changes\nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nSalaries and Benefits\nThe increase for salaries and benefits is based on the latest OMB economic assumptions \nfor Federal personnel costs. The increase is for promotions, living adjustments, locality \npay, within-grade increases, lump sum payments, and awards............................................. +2,088\nTravel\nFederal travel requirements are projected to increase based on operational forecasts. ......... +255\nSupport Services\n/squarecentSecurity ActivitiesSupport service requirements are projected to decrease based on efficiencies and \nstreamlining of operations; and the transfer of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization \nand Continuity of Operations activities to the National Nuclear Safety Administration. ............................................................................................................... - 1,165\n/squarecentIndependent Oversight Activities\n•Security Appraisals\nFunding increases are commensurate with the priorities associated with Secretary \nof Energy’s Security Initiatives that call for developing an elite protective force\nthrough expanded performance testing and examining protective force enhancements and protection strategies. ................................................................... +592\n•Cyber Security Appraisals\nFunding increases are commensurate with the priorities associated with Secretary \nof Energy’s Security Initiatives that call for expanding cyber security \nperformance testing and examining cyber security enhancements . ......................... +429\nTotal, Independent Oversight Activities ......................................................................... +1,021\n/squarecentDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Liaison Activities\nFunding requirements are increased due to escalation. .................................................. +84\nTotal, Support Services ..................................................................................................... -60\nOther Related ExpensesThe increase reflects a revised estimate issued by the DOE Working Capital Fund \nManager and increases for information technology support through the Office of the \nChief Information Officer..................................................................................................... +909\nTotal Funding Change, Program Direction ...................................................................... +3,192\nPage 60 Other Defense Activities/\nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance/Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional BudgetSupport Services by Category\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change\nTechnical Support\nSecurity Activities .................................... 4,574 4,092 3, 068 -1,024 -25.0%\nIndependent Oversight Activities............. 12,116 12,575 13,596 +1,021 +8.1%\nDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board\nLiaison Activities ..................................... 617 566 650 +84 +14.8%\nTotal, Technical Support ................................. 17,307 17,233 17,314 +81 +0.5%\nManagement Support\nSecurity .................................................... 1,438 1,438 1,297 -141 -9.8%\nTotal Management Support ............................. 1,438 1,438 1,297 -141 -9.8%\nTotal, Support Services ................................... 18,745 18,671 18,611 -60 -0.3%\nOther Related Expenses by Category\n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change\nOther Related Expenses\nTuition/Training of Federal Staff ............. 426 347 337 -10 -2.9%\nOther Services Procured ........................... 7,971 6,341 6,894 +553 +8.7%\nWorking Capital Fund .............................. 6,632 5,376 5,742 +366 +6.8%\nTotal, Other Related Expenses ........................ 15,029 12,064 12,973 +909 +7.5%\nPage 61 Page 62 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nOverview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetOther Defense Activities \nOffice of Environment, Safety and Health \nOverview \nAppropriation Summary by Program \n (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 \nCurrent \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nOriginal \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nAdjustmentsaFY 2006 \nCurrent \nAppropriation FY 2007 \nRequest \nOther Defense Activities \n Environment, Safety & Health \n (defense)................................................ 108,352 57,483 -575 56,908 60,738 \n Program Direction................................. 20,251 19,546 -195 19,351 20,076 \nSubtotal, Other Defense Activities........... 128,603 77,029 -770 76,259 80,814 \n Use of Prior Year Balances................... -15,000 0 0 0 0 \nTotal, Other Defense Activities............ .... 113,603 77,029 - 770 76,259 80,814 \n \nEnergy Supply and Conservation \n Environment, Safety & Health \n (non-defense)......................................... 7,936 7,100 -71 7,029 9,128 \n Program Direction................................. 19,842 20,900 -209 20,691 19,993 \nSubtotal, Energy Supply \nand Conservation............ ............... ........... 27,778 28,000 -280 27,720 29,121 \n Use of Prior Year Balances................... -285 0 0 0 0 \nTotal, Energy Supply and Conservation 27 ,493 28,000 -280 27,720 29,121 \nTotal, Other Defense Activities \nand Energy Supply and Conservation...... 14 1,096 105,029 -1,050 103,979 109,935 \nPreface\nThe Office of Environment, Safety and Health (EH) is committed to ensuring that the safety and health \nof the DOE workforce and members of the public and the protection of the environment are integrated into all Departmental activities. \nWithin the Other Defense Activities Appropriation, the Office of Environment, Safety and Health has \ntwo programs: Environment, Safety and Health Programs (three subprograms) and Program Direction (three subprograms). \nThis overview will describe Strategic Context, Mission, and Benefits. These items together put this \nappropriation in perspective. The Annual Performance Results and Targets, Means and Strategies, and Validation and Verification sections address how the goals will be achieved and how performance will \nbe measured. Finally, this Overview will also address Significant Program Shifts.\na Includes a 1% rescission in acco rdance with Public Law 10 9-148, FY 2006 Department of Defense Appropriation Act \nPage 63 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nOverview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetStrategic Context \nFollowing publication of the Administration’s National Energy Policy, the Department developed a \nStrategic Plan that defines its mission, four strategic goals for accomplishing that mission, and seven general goals to support the strategic goals. As stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished not only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying \nout the mission. The Office of Environment, Safety and Health performs critical functions which \ndirectly support the mission of the Department. These functions include: \nƒEnvironment – Ensure the protection of the environmental resources affected by DOE activities. \nƒSafety – Operate to industry standards where they are relevant and available and provide regulations \nfor those operations that are unique to DOE; perform at a level equal to or better than private industry.\nƒHealth – Promotes the health and safety of DOE’s workers and communities surrounding DOE sites; \nto develop comprehensive and effective safety and health policy for DOE workplace hazards, and to conduct studies and medical screening to understand the effects of radiation, chemical and other potential hazards of DOE operations on humans. \nƒCorporate Performance Assessment – Provide environment, safety and health performance trending, analysis, and measures to ensure DOE’s ES&H goals are accomplished. Performance trending and analysis also focuses resources and senior management attention on significant and emerging issues.Ensure operating experience, including lessons learned and best practices, are identified and shared throughout the DOE to continuously improve performance and prevent adverse events from \nrecurring. Improve the quality of worker radiation exposure measurements, thus helping to prevent \nfuture radiation exposure related litigation and compensation programs, through implementation of \nthe 10 CFR 835 required DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program. Provide the corporate framework \nto ensure quality assurance is properly applied to all DOE operations and that work is performed safely and reliably. Provide the necessary policy, guidance, and corporate direction. Provide the Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program to ensure quality in environmental measurements in support of DOE cleanup activities. The Information Management programs ensure that information technology is acquired and information resources are managed in a manner that implements the policies and procedures of legislation and the President’s Management Agenda. \nƒNuclear/Worker Safety Enforcement - Implement DOE’s congressional mandates to investigate safety conditions or events and apply enforcement sanctions to contractors for unsafe actions or conditions that violate DOE nuclear safety and worker safety requirements for protecting workers and the public.\nƒNuclear Safety Research – Develops, prioritizes and approves an annual nuclear safety research plan that meets the needs of the DOE Energy, Science and Environment (ESE) Central Technical Authority (CTA) and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) CTA, and that takes into account information obtained through the Operating Experience Program; maintains adequate numbers of technically competent personnel necessary to fulfill nuclear safety research responsibilities; integrates existing nuclear safety research being performed both inside and outside \nPage 64 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nOverview FY 2007 Congressional Budgetthe DOE; and participates in and repr esents DOE at national and international nuclear safety \nresearch organizations and their activities. \nMission\nThe mission of the EH is to provide the corporate leadership, performance goals, assistance, policies, \nprograms and feedback to enable the Department of Energy to excel in mission performance while \nachieving excellence in safety and environmental stewardship. \nEnvironment, Safety and Health performs critical functions which directly support the mission of the \nDepartment. These functions include providing technical support and assistance; assessing performance; ensuring quality assurance is properly applied; developing corporate policy, guidance, rules, orders and standards; and supporting an effective collaborative radiological and non radiological health studies program. \nBenefits\nDOE works to identify health concerns, investigate health effects from similar operations, integrate new \noccupational health understanding into DOE operations, and support the Department of Labor in implementing the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. EH leverages its resources and personnel to provide DOE’s line management programs with essential environment, safety and health performance expectations: environment, safety and health performance measures and analysis; management tools to promote the safe conduct of work, including the Department’s Quality Assurance Program; and guidance for the protection of the environment in and around DOE sites. Integral to the Department’s success is EH’s skill in fostering increased awareness and providing support to line management throughout the Department, using open communications, coordinating with other industry and governmental organizations, and performance feedback on environmental, safety, and health activities, to provide the safety infrastructure that allows for and promotes the safe and \nenvironmentally responsible conduct of work. The Department of Energy Laboratory Accreditation \nProgram promotes worker confidence that work is being accomplished safely, and provides the quality assurance documentation that could help prevent future worker radiation exposure litigation or additional worker exposure compensation programs. \nPage 65 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nOverview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetAnnual Performance Results and Targetsa\nFY 2002 Results FY 2003 Results FY 2004 Results FY 2005 Results FY 2006 Targets FY 2007 Targets \n \n \nEnvironment, Safety and Health/Health \n Former Worker Program \nparticipants who receive \nmedical screening during FY 2007, will score a ratings of \n85% or greater on a quality \nsurvey. A baseline will be \nestablished in FY 2006. \n Deliver 200 scheduled medical \nexams in FY 2007 to participants in the Marshall Islands medical monitoring \nprogram. A baseline will be \nestablished in FY 2006. \n \n Using FY 2004 year-end \nuncosted balances as the \nbaseline, increase efficiency in \nthe achievement of program \ngoals and use of appropriated \nfunds by reducing the level of \nuncosted balances in EH by \n5% in FY 2007.\na Annual effectiveness and efficiency performance targets will not be repor ted in the Department’s annu al Performance and Accoun tability Report (PAR). \nPage 66 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nOverview FY 2007 Congressional Budget Means and Strategies\nThe Office of Environment, Safety and Health will pursue the following means and strategies: \nƒEnsure DOE excellence in environment, safety and health.\nƒEnsure the protection of the environmental resources affected by DOE activities.\nƒEnsure DOE facilities operate safely.\nƒEnsure the safety and health of workers at DOE facilities and the communities that surround them.\nƒEnsure accountability and continuous improvement in environment, safety, and health performance.\nƒEnsure EH meets the goals of the President’s Management Agenda, initiative 4, “Expanded \nElectronic Government.”\nƒEnsure EH organizational effectiveness.\nƒEnsure continuance of record research activities in support of the Department of Labor as required by Part E of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. (Public Law 108-375).\nValidation and Verification \nTo validate and verify program performance, the Office of Environment, Safety and Health will conduct \nvarious internal and external reviews and audits. Programmatic activities are subject to continuing reviews by the Congress, the Government Accountability Office, the Department’s Inspector General, and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. In addition, Headquarters senior managers conduct in-depth reviews of cost and schedule to ensure activities are on-track and within budget.\nSignificant Policy or Program Shifts \nEnvironment, Safety and Health significant policy and program shifts are as follows: \nƒOn December 17, 2004, in response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation \n2004-1, former Deputy Secretary for Energy McSlarrow directed the following organizational changes for the Department to better focus departmental awareness and management of issues related to nuclear safety. To enhance the focus of environment, safety, and health in the Department, the Office of Environment, Safety and Health (EH) is now reporting directly to the Deputy Secretary of Energy. EH is the corporate environmental, safety and health (ES&H) officer and responsible for making ES&H policy and providing technical interpretations of it. \nƒIn FY 2006, the Office of Environmental Management will transfer the management of High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filter testing service responsibilities to the Office of Environment, \nSafety and Health. Financial responsibility will transfer in FY 2007. This Quality Assurance function ensures HEPA filters used at DOE’s nuclear facilities meet strict criteria to ensure public and worker safety and implements a Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board commitment to test \n100 percent of all HEPA filters prior to use in defense nuclear facilities. \nƒThe Office of Environment, Safety and Health needs to significantly strengthen the Department’s \nOperating Experience Program to meet a formal commitment to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. This is a critical aspect of the Department’s safety management system for operations feedback and improvement. \nPage 67 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nOverview FY 2007 Congressional Budget ƒFederal functions at the Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory will be studied for \ncompetition with the private sector. \nPage 68 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget Office of Environment, Safety and Health \nFunding by Site by Program \n(dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n \nAdvancedMed - Hanford..................................................................... 110 109 109 \nBrookhaven National Laboratory........................................................ 65 64 64 \nChicago Operations Office.................................................................. 10,350 0 49 \nEast Tennessee Technology Park (K25)............... ............... ............... 20 20 20 \nHanford Site........................................................................................ 100 148 173 \nIdaho National Laboratory.................................................................. 95 94 94 \nIdaho Operations Office...................................................................... 4,805 3,784 2,826 \nKansas City Plant................................................................................ 70 69 49 \nLawrence Berkeley National Lab........................................................ 540 535 297 \nLawrence Livermore National Laboratory.......................................... 3,120 3,336 3,361 \nLos Alamos National Laboratory........................................................ 326 323 247 \nNevada Site Office.............................................................................. 3,030 3,000 3,000 \nNNSA Service Center......................................................................... 2,650 0 297 \nOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education…………………...... 1,770 1,752 1,901 \nOak Ridge Nat'l Laboratory................................................................ 460 455 406 \nOak Ridge Operations Office.............................................................. 4,955 747 2,252 \nOhio Field Office................................................................................ 370 69 118 \nPacific Northwest National Laboratory.............................................. 779 663 647 \nPantex Site Office............................................................................... 90 89 89 \nRadiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory....................... 2,675 2,507 2,635 \nRichland Operations Office................................................................. 1,700 297 817 \nRocky Flats Field Office..................................................................... 770 0 99 \nSandia National Laboratories.............................................................. 165 134 129 \nSavannah River Operations Office...................................................... 3,370 69 222 \nY-12 Site Office.................................................................................. 30 30 40 \nWashington Headquarters.... .................. .................. .................. ......... 86,188 57,965 60,873 \nTotal, Other Defense Activities........................................................... 128,603 76,259 80,814 \nMajor Changes or Shifts by Site \nWashington Headquarters \nCooperative agreements for the Former Worker Program, as well as the international health studies, will\nno longer be implemented and maintained through the Chicago Operations Office but will be implemented and maintained through Washington Headquarters.\nPage 69 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget Site Description \nAdvancedMed - Hanford \nThis site is located in Richland, Washington on the Hanford Site and supports the Operations Office.\nAdvancedMed – Hanford participates in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data in support of the Office of Health. AdvancedMed also coordinates with the University of Washington to offer a resource to current Hanford Tank Farm workers for independent medical screening. \nBrookhaven National Laboratory \nBrookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) is located in Upton, New York, on Long Island. As a non-\ndefense research institution, BNL is dedicated to basic and applied investigation in a multitude of scientific disciplines. BNL also provides specialized subject matter technical expertise in conducting reviews of safety analysis and risk assessment documents such as Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) and Basis for Interim Operations (BIO). BNL provides specialized technical expertise input to be used by \nthe Federal staff to develop rules, orders, safety guides, and standards. These documents may include SARs, technical safety requirements, waste disposal standards, fire protection standards, lightning and wind protection standards, and facility operation. In addition, Brookhaven participates in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data in support of the Office of Health. \nChicago Operations Office \nChicago Operations Office, Chicago, Illinois, is responsible for overseeing the operation of contractor-\noperated, multi-program laboratories such as Argonne National Laboratory and Brookhaven National Laboratory.\nChicago Operations Office has provided services that support the implementation and maintenance of \nselected cooperative agreements for the Former Worker Program as well as support for some international health studies through FY 2005. In FY 2006, the cooperative agreements for the Former Worker Program as well as the international health studies will be implemented and maintained through Washington Headquarters. In addition, the Chicago Operations Office researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. \nEast Tennessee Technology Park (K25) \nThis site is located in the East Tennessee Technology Park on the Oak Ridge Reservation and is \nresponsible for research and development, defense programs, environmental management, and environment, safety and health activities. Bechtel Jacobs (K25) participates in the Illness and Injury \nSurveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data in support of the Office of Health. \nPage 70 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget Hanford Site \nThis site is located in Richland, Washington and manages environment, safety and health activities and \nsupports cleanup and environmental restoration at the Hanford site. The Analytical Services Program work with Bechtel Hanford, Inc. supports the development of software toolkits to assist Departmental Field element sites in its environmental remediation and clean-up decision-making and implementation. The Visual toolkit enables environmental professionals to use the Data Quality Assessment process to \nmake defensible, cost-effective decisions as simply as possible. This site ensures that effective safety \npolicies and procedures guide the operations of DOE facilities. \nIdaho National Laboratory \nThe Idaho National Laboratory (INL) located in Idaho Falls, executes multi-program missions and \nleverages expertise with emerging technology to meet the Nation’s needs. INL participates in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and\ndemographic data in support of the Office of Health. \nIdaho Operations Office \nIdaho Operations Office, Idaho Falls, Idaho, executes a multi-program mission, and leverages the Idaho \nNational Laboratory’s expertise with emerging technology to meet the Nation’s needs. The Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory, which administers the DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program, mandated by 10 CFR 835, administratively reports to the Idaho Operations Office. This accreditation program assures that worker radiation exposures are accurately determined and helps prevent future litigation and worker radiation exposure compensation programs. The Analytical Services Program (ASP) provides support for development of a web based reporting system \nin support of the Department of Energy’s Consolidated Audit Program. This site conducts DOE-wide \nperformance evaluation and accreditation programs, provides technical support and measurement quality \nassurance methodologies to strengthen programs. These programs provide for technically and legally \ndefensible results of such measurements. In addition, this site researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. \nKansas City Plant \nThis facility produces or procures non-nuclear electronics, electromechanical, mechanical, plastic, and \nnon-fissionable metal components for DOE’s National Defense mission. Kansas City Plant participates in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through the collection and transmission of worker health and demographic data, in support of the Office of Health. \nLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory \nLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, pursues basic and applied research that \nadvances the frontiers of science and solves a broad spectrum of national problems. It is a multi-program laboratory that serves the Nation’s needs in technologies and environment, safety and health activities. The site provides continuous public access to an organized, well-documented, retrievable collection of DOE health effects information through an electronic data base, the Comprehensive \nPage 71 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget Epidemiologic Data Resources (CEDR). In addition, this site researches and provides employee \nemployment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. \nLawrence Livermore National Laboratory \nLawrence Livermore National Laboratory, (LLNL), located in California’s Tri-Valley region east of San \nFrancisco, supports the Marshall Islands program by providing environmental sampling and analysis to \ndetermine the radiological conditions at the affected atolls. LLNL provides software quality assurance expertise support to maintain the code registry that is important for nuclear safety analysis throughout the complex. The Central Registry is important in the analysis of the DOE nuclear facilities to ensure that their operations do not impact the health and safety of the public, the environment and the workers. Lawrence Livermore also supports the development of Software Quality Assurance documentation for EPICode. EPICode is a software tool used by nuclear analysts to determine potential accident consequences for nuclear facility operation. This project will upgrade the software quality assurance to \nensure that the results obtained from these calculations are accurate for DOE facilities. Lawrence Livermore also participates in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through the collection and transmission of worker health and demographic data, in support of the Office of Health.\nLos Alamos National Laboratory\nLos Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is located in Los Alamos County, northwest of Santa Fe, New \nMexico. Its major activities include research and development, nuclear weapons safety, and environmental restoration. Los Alamos National Laboratory participates in the Illness and Injury \nSurveillance Program through the collection and transmission of worker health and demographic data in support of the Office of Health. \nNevada Site Office \nThe Nevada Test Site implements DOE initiatives in stockpile stewardship, crisis management, waste \nmanagement, environment, safety, and health management and programs, as well as supporting other DOE programs. The Nevada Test Site provides technical support to the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data, in support of the Office of Health. In addition, this site researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. \nNational Nuclear Security Administration Service Center \nThis site provides liaison between the National Nuclear Security Administration service center and the \nsite contractor. In addition, this site researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. \nPage 72 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) \nThe Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) is a U.S. Department of Energy facility, \nlocated on a 150-acre site in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, focusing on scientific initiatives to research health risks from occupational hazards, assess environmental cleanup, respond to radiation medical emergencies, support radiation medical emergencies, support national security and emergency preparedness, and educate the next generation of scientists. ORISE is managed by Oak Ridge \nAssociated Universities. ORISE provides services and products that support the development, \nimplementation, and maintenance of international health studies and the Former Worker Program screening and medical examinations for former employees who are at risk for chronic beryllium disease due to their work at DOE and analysis of data obtained on these individuals; provide technical support to the Office of Health in the areas of data management, quality assurance, analysis, report preparation, and program implementation at sites. Provides support in the administration, training, materials and follow-up services for the Office of Health activities including conferences, workshops, and training materials. ORISE is the data center for processing Office of Health’s Illness and Injury Surveillance Program. \nORISE provides data gathering and analysis services that support development of human reliability program polices for the medical and psychological fitness of individuals occupying safety or security sensitive positions. ORISE supports the Beryllium Exposure Registry and analyses. Through a separate cooperative agreement with Office of Health, ORISE conducts the National Former Worker Medical Supplemental Screening Program. This program serves former workers not covered by Office of Health’s site-specific former worker medical screening initiatives.\nOak Ridge National Laboratory \nOak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Roane County, Tennessee, is a multi-program science and \ntechnology laboratory. Scientists and engineers at the laboratory provide specialized technical expertise \nin environment, safety, and health activities; and restoration and protection of the environment. The \nlaboratory provides specialized technical expertise in the development of risk-based, integrated worker safety programs through the development of input and resource information for various technical standards and guides. ORNL provides services and products that support the development, implementation, and maintenance of international health studies. Provides support in the administration, training, materials, and follow-up services for the Office of Health activities including conference, workshops, and training materials. ORNL participates in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data in support of the Office of Health. ORNL also manages a toll-free inf ormation hotline for former workers interested in \nlearning more about medical screening services available to them through the Office of Health’s Former Worker Program. \nOak Ridge Operations Office \nOak Ridge Operations Office, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, is responsible for research and development, \ndefense programs, environmental management, and environment, safety, and health activities. There are three major plant complexes on the Oak Ridge Reservation: Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Y-12 Plant; and the East Tennessee Technology Park, as well as the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education and the American Museum of Science and Energy. This site ensures that environmental analytical data is of high quality and reliability and assures that analytical data is technically defensible.The program conducts consolidated audits that also include DOE on-site laboratories to demonstrate a \nPage 73 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget fair and equitable selection among laboratories selected for environmental analytical service contracts.\nIn addition, this site researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness \nCompensation Program Act, Part E. \nOhio Field Office \nThe Department of Energy’s Ohio Field Office includes five sites, four in Ohio and one in New York. \nIts primary mission includes overseeing the five project offices responsible for environmental restoration, waste management, and nuclear material and facility stabilization. In addition, this site researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. Fluor Fernald is one of the five project offices responsible for environmental restoration, waste management, and nuclear material and facility stabilization. The Fernald site \nparticipates in the Office of Health programs and provides access to site records and information for use in occupational and public health studies being performed by the Department of Health and Human Services under their Memorandum of Understanding with DOE. Fernald participates in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through the collection and transmission of worker health and demographic data in support of the Office of Health. \nPacific Northwest National Laboratory \nPacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, Washington, develops and delivers new and \neffective environment, safety, and health technologies. PNNL provides technical support in preparing policies, procedures, and guides, as well as developing materials that address the process and protocols that are used for program implementation, planning, analysis of evaluation results and trends, and \ncompilation of policy issues related to the evaluations. PNNL provides support to the international \nhealth studies program. Over the past 10 years, PNNL has supported DOE’s Systematic Planning and Data Quality Objectives (DQO) initiatives. This project has evolved from general DQO training and implementation support to tools development and specific training on tools and approaches to systematic planning. DOE sponsored the initial developments of Visual Sample Plan (VSP), a software tool that ensures the right type, quality, and quantity of data are obtained to support confident decisions. VSP has evolved into a multi-agency toolkit supported by DOE, EPA, DOD, and DHS. This site ensures that effective safety policies and procedures guide the operati ons of DOE facilities. This site also facilitates \naccess to cumulative dosimetry data and information resulting from studies of historical releases of contaminants that traveled off site from DOE facilities (environmental dose reconstructions). PNNL provides technical support to the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through assistance in developing methods to estimate cumulative dosimetry exposures for current workers. \nPantex Site Office \nThe National Nuclear Security Administration Pantex Site Office manages the Pantex Plant, a 10,500-\nacre site, located approximately 17 miles northeast of Amarillo, Texas. The Pantex Site provides technical support to the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data, in support of the Office of Health. \nPage 74 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) \nRESL is a DOE-owned and operated Federal reference laboratory with core mission capabilities in \nradiation measurement and calibrations, and analytical chemistry. The laboratory conducts measurement quality assurance programs to assure that key DOE missions are completed in a safe and environmentally responsible manner. \nRichland Operations Office \nRichland Operations Office, Richland, Washington, manages waste products; develops, applies, and \ncommercializes technologies; manages environment, safety, and health activities; and supports cleanup and environmental restoration at the Hanford site. In addition, this site researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. \nRocky Flats Field Office \nRocky Flats is a former nuclear weapons facility located approximately 16 miles northwest of Denver, \nColorado. This site researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. Site closure is anticipated in December 2005. \nSandia National Laboratories \nSandia National Laboratories’ main laboratory is located on Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, \nNew Mexico. Sandia provides specialized technical expertise in the evaluation of long-term dry storage \nof K-Basin Spent Nuclear Fuel, taking into account the associated physical and chemical changes. \nSandia also provides specialized technical expertise in the development of software for radiological hazard analyses at DOE facilities. This site ensu res that effective safety policies and procedures guide \nthe operations of DOE facilities. Sandia also provides technical support to the Illness and Injury Surveillance program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data, in support of the Office of Health. \nSavannah River Operations Office \nSavannah River Operations Office, Aiken, South Carolina, serves national interest by ensuring that \nprograms, operations, and resources at the Savannah River Site are managed in a safe, open, and cost-effective manner to: support current and future national security requirements and conduct mission-supportive research. Savannah River Operations and the contractors operating the Savannah River Site support the Office of Health, provide access to site records and information for use in occupational and public-health related studies being performed by the Department of Health and Human Service under their Memorandum of Understanding with DOE. Savannah River Site supports the Office of Health through participation in the Illness and Injury Surveillance Program. This site also researches and provides worker employment, medical and exposure records in support of the Department of Labor’s implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Part E. Savannah River Site provides technical and staff support in the areas of Quality Assurance and Software Quality Assurance to include proposed improvement areas for DOE Corporate Quality Assurance; \nPage 75 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nFunding by Site FY 2007 Congressional Budget Central Registry; and Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board (DNFSB) commitments and \nrecommendations. Savannah River Site also provides support for improvements to the Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS) and associated processes to include training; updates to \ncomputer-based training products; causal analysis; and performance analysis. \nY-12 Site Office \nY-12, located about two miles southwest of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, provides technical support to the \nIllness and Injury Surveillance Program through collection and transmission of worker health, exposure, and demographic data, in support of the Office of Health. \nWashington Headquarters\nThe Office of Environment, Safety and Health (EH) Headquarters, located in the Washington, D.C. \nMetropolitan area, supports the EH mission by funding Federal staff responsible for directing, administering, and supporting the EH program in the areas of facility safety, corporate performance assessment, health, enforcement, nuclear safety, nuclear safety research, and worker advocacy. In addition, Federal staff is responsible for management, policy, personnel, technical/administrative support activities, budget, finance, and contracts and cooperative agreements. The Office of Information Management requires contractor support to ensure that information technology is acquired and information resources are managed in a manner that implements the policies and procedures of the President’s Management Agenda, and legislation including the Paperwork Reduction Act and the Clinger-Cohen Act. This Office establishes, implements, and maintains a comprehensive and effective cyber/computer security, Capital Planning and Investment Control, and Federal Enterprise Architecture programs in order to support the President’s Management Agenda initiative to Expand Electronic Government. \nPage 76 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense) FY 2007 Congressional Budget Environment, Safety and Health (defense) \nFunding Profile by Subprogram \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 \nCurrent \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nOriginal \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nAdjustmentsaFY 2006 \nCurrent \nAppropriation FY 2007 \nRequest \nEnvironment, Safety and Health \n(defense) \n Corporate Safety Programs...... ............. 10,808 11,183 -112 11,071 15,663 \n Health.......... ................ ............... ........... 54,841 46,300 -463 45,837 40,620 \n Employee Compensation Program........ 42,703 0 0 0 4,455 \nTotal, Environment Safety and \nHealth (defense)....................................... 108,352 57,483 -575 56,908 60,738 \nPublic Law Authorizations: \nPublic Law 83-703, “Atomi c Energy Act of 1954”, as amended \nPublic Law 100-408, “Pri ce-Anderson Amendments Act of 1988” \nPublic Law 103-337, “Natio nal Defense Authorization Act of 1995” \nPublic Law 108-188, “Com pact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003” \nPublic Law 99-239, “Compact of Free Association Act of 1985” \nPublic Law 95-134, “Marshall Islands (Related to Rongelap and Utirik Atolls)” \nPublic Law 96-205, “Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands” \nPublic Law 95-91, “Department of Energy Or ganization Act” \nPublic Law 103-62, “Government Per formance and Results Act of 1993” \nPublic Law 107-310, “Dam Safety and Securities Act of 2002” Public Law 108-375, “The Ronald W. Reagan Nati onal Defense Authorization Act for FY 2005” \n42 U.S.C. Section 7274 “Program to Monitor DOE Work ers Exposed to Hazardous and Radioactive Substances” \nPublic Law 109-163, “The National Defense Author ization Act for FY 2006” \nMission\nThe mission of the Office of Environment, Safety and Health (EH) is to provide leadership and \nDepartmental direction through line programs to protect the workers, the public, and the environment. \nBenefits\nWithin the Other Defense Activities appropriation, EH plays a key role in achieving the Department’s \nmission. A commitment to excellence is achieved by continuously striving for improvement through: developing meaningful programs and policies; performance trending and analysis to ensure senior management operational awareness of safety issues; providing leadership and assistance to DOE Field operations to ensure the complex learns from each others mistakes and shares best operations practices; enforcing nuclear safety and ensuring quality assurance programs, including policies and standards, are in place and functioning properly across the Department. Open communication, participation, and \nperformance feedback on EH activities from affected parties are integral to EH’s success. The hallmark \na Includes a 1% rescission in acco rdance with Public Law 10 9-148, FY 2006 Department of Defense Appropriation Act \nPage 77 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense) FY 2007 Congressional Budget and highest priority of all EH activities is daily excellence in the protection of workers, the public, and \nthe environment. \nPage 78 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nCorporate Safety Programs FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Corporate Safety Programs \nFunding Schedule by Activity \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n \n Corporate Safety Programs \n Corporate Safety Programs................................................... 5,325 5,643 11,035 \n Radiological and Enviro nmental Sciences Laborator y……. 4,174 4,132 2,450 \n Analytical Services Program................................................. 1,309 1,296 1,188 \n Nuclear Safety Research....................................................... 0 0 990 \n Total, Corporate Safety Progr ams................ ..................... ........ 10,808 11,071 15,663 \nDescription \nCorporate Safety Programs serve a crosscutting safety function for the Department and its stakeholders \nin assuring excellence and continuous improvement in environment, safety and health in the conduct of its missions and activities. Elements that comprise Corporate Safety Programs are: Performance Assessment, the Quality Assurance Program, Information Management, the Facility Safety Program, Price-Anderson Enforcement, the Analytical Services Program, and the new Nuclear Safety Research \nProgram. In June 2005, the Secretary signed the Department’s Implementation Plan (Rev. 1) in \nresponse to DNFSB Recommendation 2004-1. DOE has committed to enhance the nuclear safety research function within the Department. \nBenefits\nThese programs conduct activities that are critical to the Department’s ability to monitor the status of \nenvironment, safety and health across the complex; to proactively identify and resolve emerging safety issues and adverse trends; and to assure continuous improvement in the protection of workers, communities, and the environment from the hazards associated with changing DOE missions and activities. The program also serves our national security mission by assuring the effective integration of safety and success of mission programs, including security of our energy infrastructure, research and development, stockpile stewardship, and accelerated cleanup of DOE’s excess sites and environmental contamination. Nuclear Safety Research will evaluate and prioritize nuclear safety research needs; allocate resources; manage research programs; assess the effectiveness of regulatory programs; develop technical basis for nuclear directives; maintain nuclear safety testing and analysis capabilities; integrate results in the areas of nuclear facility design and construction, safety analysis, safe nuclear operations, integrate existing nuclear safety research being performed both inside and outside the DOE; and development of technically sound safety directives. \nPage 79 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nCorporate Safety Programs FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Detailed Justification \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 \n \n Corporate Safety Programs......................................... 5,325 5,643 11,035\nCorporate Safety Programs includes funding for the ES&H Performance Assessment Program, the \nQuality Assurance Program, Information Management, the Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory, Analytical Services Program, Nuclear Safety Research, the Facility Safety Program, and Price-Anderson Enforcement. \nThe Performance Assessment Program includes (1) Operating Experience, and (2) Performance \nTrending and Analysis. Trending and analysis of DOE’s performance in protecting the public, workers, and the environment is conducted by synthesizing operational information to support senior management decision-making, resource allocation, and continuous ES&H improvement across the DOE complex. This includes setting ES&H performance expectations and performance measurements for continuous improvement. Performance Trending and Analysis also develops and implements improved methods for using current databases and communicating information (e.g., data mining and display \ncapabilities); uses state-of-the-art commercial experience to identify and use leading performance measures to leverage safety performance; and provides analysis of safety performance tailored to nuclear safety (i.e., Central Technical Authorities (CTAs) Chief of Nuclear Safety and Nuclear Safety Research) functions in FY 2007. \nThe Program implements a significantly enhanced and adequate Operating Experience activity DOE-\nwide. Operating Experience is crucial in the Department’s follow-up to internal and external accidents and events to ensure they do not recur. In FY 2007, EH will fully implement a functional Operating Experience program that meets Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) 2004-1 commitments; significantly improves DOE/contractor awareness and resolution of operational safety issues that are generic or crosscut DOE; issue actionable information that will improve DOE and contractor worker safety and their day-to-day performance; and monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of contractor actions that use Operating Experience information. This program is also responsible for the DOE Suspect/Counterfeit Items identification and investigation process which also supports Department of Justice and other Federal Agency investigations of related fraud. This activity is an \nongoing high priority commitment made to the DNFSB by the Secretary.\nThe Quality Assurance Program was established in FY 2003 to address corporate quality assurance \nissues identified by the General Accounting Office, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and other quality assurance issues in the Department. The Office of Quality Assurance Programs provides DOE corporate leadership that includes quality assurance information, corporate policy and guidance, and \ncertification to support DOE mission accomplishment across the DOE complex and manages the Central \nRegistry to support effective configuration and control of safety-related Software Toolbox Codes. This program establishes requirements and policies to support existing activities such as High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filter testing, centr al registry for safety related computer software, and the DOE \nSelf-Assessment Certification Program.\nPage 80 (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nOther Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nCorporate Safety Programs FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget In FY 2006, the Office of Environmental Management will transfer the management of HEPA filter \ntesting services responsibilities to the Office of Environment, Safety and Health. Financial responsibility will transfer in FY 2007. The Filter Test Facility (FTF) will improve the Department’s \nquality assurance function to serve all Departmental programs. DOE has committed to conduct 100 \npercent independent testing of HEPA filters installed in safety systems (safety class and safety \nsignificant) and habitability systems. The Office of Environmental Management FTF operations \nresulted in an average of 2,600 filters tested annually from DOE nuclear facilities. The FTF operation is \nnecessary because of the critical nature of the f ilter usage in DOE facilities in mitigating radioactive \nexposure to the public, workers and the environment. DOE-STD-3020-97, Specifications for HEPA \nFilters Used by DOE Contractors , requires that each filter be test ed by both the manufacturer and FTF. \nInformation Management is a critical component of corporate safety programs. The program manages and directs defense-related infor mation activities to maximize the sharing and efficient use of data and \ninformation to meet the requirements of Federal regulations and legislation as well as the President’s \nManagement Agenda (PMA) initiative “Expanded Electronic Government”. This program provides both web pages and web-based database systems including access to the EH Corporate Reporting Systems (Occurrence Reporting and Processing System and the Computerized Accident and Illness Systems) as well as mission-specific systems. These systems will be re-engineered for efficiency by consolidating existing databases and utilizing the latest techno logical capabilities to distribute \ninformation, including health studies communications management capability and web-based health studies status. Further enhancement of the EH website with portal and workflow tools will enable EH to \nadhere to new OMB guidelines on Federal Website Administration and to support the newly-established Federal Health Line of Business.\nTo address immediate ES&H issues in the Department, the Facility Safety Program performs \nevaluations including accident investigations, facility author izations bases, and safety allegations. \nSpecial safety reviews are conducted for nuclear hazards, criticality safety, seismic analysis, fire protection, occupational and construction safety, emergency operations, facility design, and the startup and restart of facilities. \nSafety Basis Corporate Support provides technical support for effective implementation of safety \nregulations (e.g., 10 CFR 830) for facility design, construction, operation, and decommissioning. Activities includes support of Critical Decision for nuclear facilities under design or major modification; support to RW on design and safety review of Yucca Mountain geological repository project; review of safety bases for nuclear facilities in operation and decommissioning phases including high hazard facilities such as ATR and HFIR; support for review of accident analysis of Environmental Impact Statements; evaluation of Unreviewed Safety Questions, and publication of lessons learned reports; and other studies or reviews as requested. \nEH conducts Type A investigations for the more serious incidents occurring within the DOE Complex, \nand reviews Type B investigation reports for investigations conducted by line program elements for less serious incidents. Inconsistencies observed in Type B investigations have highlighted the need for the office to conduct independent programmatic oversight during selected Type B Accident Investigations \nPage 81 (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nOther Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nCorporate Safety Programs FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget and to conduct training courses for Type A and B Accident Investigation Boards and Chairpersons to \nqualify those personnel to perform investigations when needed. \nReadiness Reviews are conducted at Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities prior to authorizing the \nstartup or restart of those facilities. As the Office of Primary Interest for the Readiness Review process, EH and the DNFSB staff have identified inconsistencies and deficiencies in process implementation across the complex. Consequently, additional efforts will be focused on these areas before they result in \na major site incident or become the basis for a new DNFSB Recommendation. Based on current line \nprogram projections, the office will participate as team members or in Independent Reviews during a number of ORRs/RAs, will sponsor ORR Team Member/Team Leader training sessions, and will provide technical support to line program management. The office will also draft revision “D” of DOE Order 425.1C and associated Standard 3006-2000. \nThe Office of Facility Authorization Bases serves as the Dam Safety Coordinator for DOE. Under the \nprovisions of a Memorandum of Agreement between DOE and the Federal Energy Regulatory \nCommission (FERC), the FERC inspectors provide safety inspections of dams and other water \nimpoundment structures owned by DOE across the DOE complex. \nThe EH Enforcement program carries out the statutory mandate of the Price-Anderson Amendments Act \nof 1988 to enforce compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations for nuclear safety requirements at DOE sites and enforcement of worker safety.\nCorporate Safety Programs also includes funding for the Department of Energy Laboratory \nAccreditation Program and the Analytical Services Program (run by the Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory) as follows: \n Radiological and Environmental Sciences Lab............. 4,174 4,132 2,450\nThe Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) is DOE’s Federal reference laboratory that conducts performance evaluation and accreditation activities, provides technical support and measurement, and quality assurance methodologies to programs such as the DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program, and the Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program. These programs act as insurance policies against potential radiation exposure or D&D litigation or future worker compensation programs. The responsibility to operate RESL was transferred from EM to EH in FY 2004.\n Analytical Services Program.......................................... 1,309 1,296 1,188\nThe Analytical Services Program ensures that environmental analytical laboratory data is of high quality and reliability and assures that analytical data is technically and legally defensible. The program implements DOE’s Consolidated Audit Program thereby reducing redundant field audits of commercial analytical laboratories and Treatment, Storage & Disposal Facilities, resulting in significant cost savings for the Government. \nPage 82 (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nOther Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nCorporate Safety Programs FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Nuclear Safety Research................................................. 0 0 990\nOn December 23, 2004, the Secretary signed the Department’s Implementation Plan in response to \nDNFSB Recommendation 2004-1. DOE has committed to enhance the nuclear safety research function \nwithin the Department. \nThe Secretary formally established that the Office of Environment, Safety and Health has primary \nresponsibility for the nuclear safety research function. EH has been formally assigned the following roles and responsibilities: establish the Office of Nuclear Safety Research; initiate the necessary activities to develop, prioritize and approve an annual nuclear safety research plan that meets the needs of the DOE Central Technical Authorities; implement the annual nuclear safety research plan after approval by the Assistant Secretary; identify changes in DOE directives and standards based on nuclear safety results; maintain adequate numbers of technically competent personnel necessary to fulfill nuclear safety research responsibilities; participate in and represent DOE at national and international nuclear safety research organizations and their activities; and respond to DNFSB Recommendation 2004-1 on nuclear safety research management. \nThe Office of Nuclear Safety Research plans to implement the following functions and activities: \ndescribe the interfaces between the nuclear safety research program and other organizations (e.g., Program Secretarial Officers, sites, CTA(s)); determine required technical area staffing needs; establish the safety research assessment and prioritization criteria and guidance; initiate the process of identifying, prioritizing, and executing safety-related research and development; identify nuclear safety research needs; review and evaluate operating experiences and line oversight findings as potential sources of nuclear safety research needs; integrate existing nuclear safety research being performed both inside and outside the DOE; fund specific nuclear safety research projects/efforts; and prepare and issue an annual nuclear safety research report for approval by the Assistant Secretary for EH. During FY 2007, EH will also conduct a gap analysis on existing nuclear safety research activities throughout DOE, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and elsewhere to determine the appropriate size and focus for this nuclear research program. \nThe Office of Nuclear Safety Research will technically and programmatically lead each research project. \nThis will include clearly defining the scope of each research project; developing schedules with \nintermediate milestones; and reviewing/verifying the research findings, including use of peer review \nwhere applicable. \nCongressionally Directed Activities............................. 0 0 0\nAdditional funding was also directed by Congress in FY 2006 for the DOE Worker Records Digitization Project in Nevada ($4M) and Initiation of the Chernobyl Research and Service Project ($5M). The Department has analyzed how best to satisfy these two activities consistent with EH’s FY 2006 Congressional Budget request and subsequent appropriation. As a result, EH is making use of prior year unobligated balances from the Corporate Safety Program ($1M) to fund these activities. \n Total, Corporate Safety Programs.............................. 10,808 11,071 15,663\nPage 83 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nCorporate Safety Programs FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Explanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nCorporate Safety Programs \nŶDecrease in the Facility Safety Program to reflect anticipated fewer reviews……….... -101\nŶDecrease reflects readjusted activities in the Quality Assurance Programs…………… -253\nŶImplement new technology for operating experience data mining and analysis across \nthe entire DOE complex. Focus on building DOE Field Office Safety performance assessment capabilities to adequate safety oversight of contractors…........................... +2,427\nŶTransfer of HEPA Filter Test Facility from the Office of Environmental \nManagement. ………………………………………………………………………...... +600\nŶIncrease in Operating Experience Program is to fully implement a functional OE \nprogram that meets DNFSB 2004-1 commitments; significantly improves DOE/contractor awareness and resolution of operational safety issues that are generic or crosscut DOE; issue actionable OE information that will improve safety of DOE/contractor workers and their day-to-day performance; and monitor and evaluate \neffectiveness of contractor actions that use OE information…………………………... +2,319\nŶIncrease in Performance Trending & Analysis is to expand current safety \nperformance trending, operations analyses, and identification of emerging issues to include DOE non-nuclear facilities.…………………………………………………… +400\n \nRadiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory \nDecrease reflects completion of an updated Condition Assessment Survey for the \nbuilding and the completion of necessary facility upgrades to provide adequate and safe working conditions for the scientific staff.………………………………………………… -1,682 \n \nAnalytical Services Program \nDecrease reflects completion of initial development of Visual Sample Plan Software Tool \ndevelopment………………………………………………………………………............... -108 \nNuclear Safety Research \nFunding will ensure focused management, integration, and execution of nuclear safety \nresearch and development in areas such as nuclear criticality safety, fire safety and risk assessment………………………………………………………………………………...... +990 \nTotal Funding Change, Corporate Safety Programs....................................................... +4,592 \nPage 84 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nHealth Programs FY 2007 Congressional Budget Health Programs \nFunding Schedule by Activity \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n Health Programs \n Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF).... .................. ......... 14,000 13,848 13,848 \n Marshall Islands................................................................................. 6,000 6,000 6,000 \n Other Health Programs...................................................................... 34,841 25,989 20,772 \n Total, Health Programs................ ................. ................... ............... ..... 54,841 45,837 40,620 \nDescription\nThe Office of Health supports five major program areas: the Former Worker Program (a nationwide \nprogram of medical screening to identify work related health affects); Domestic Health Studies (to investigate and identify work related injury and illness in the DOE worker population and populations \nsurrounding DOE sites); International Health Studies (support for ongoing radiation health effects \nresearch in Russia, Spain, and Japan, as well as health care and resettlement activities in the Marshall \nIslands); Worker Safety and Health and Occupational Medicine Programs (to publish DOE worker safety and health and occupational medicine program performance expectations and promote preventive \nmedicine), and Illness and Injury Surveillance program for current workers.\nBenefits\nThe benefits of these projects and programs include discovery and documenting health effects outcomes \nthat provide the scientific basis for national and international worker protection policy and standards.These radiation protection standards and practices, in turn, provide levels of protection appropriate for \nthe risk posed to workers by hazards present at DOE sites. \nDetailed Justification \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n Radiation Effects Research Foundation.................. 14,000 13,848 13,848\nUnder a binational agreement between the United States and Japan, the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) conducts epidemiologic studies and medical surveillance of the survivors of the \natomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Results from the Life Span Study of the A-bomb survivors continue to provide the scientific basis for standards setting bodies that establish national and international radiation protection policy. Based on the recently-published reassessment of doses received by the A-bomb survivors, revisions of epid emiologic data on cancer mortality and incidence in \nPage 85 (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nOther Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nHealth Programs FY 2007 Congressional Budget relation to radiation dose were completed in FY 2006. In FY 2007, new recommendations on \nradiological protection will be published by international standards organizations. \n Marshall Islands.............................................................. 6,000 6,000 6,000\nThis request funds Public Laws 99-239 and 108-188, the Compact of Free Association between the U.S. \nand Republic of the Marshall Islands. The Health program also includes a special medical care program for a small cohort of radiation–exposed individuals in the Marshall Islands and supports field science and radiological monitoring to assist decision-making on the resettlement of the displaced Atoll populations. In FY 2006 and FY 2007, the medical program will continue to provide annual examinations and cancer care, under the auspices of a new medical care provider, using a more cost effective approach; several major environmental missions to Bikini, Enewetak, and Rongelap Atolls will collect samples to assist atolls in resettlement decision-making. In FY 2007, there will be an advance contingent of resettled persons (around 150-200) at Rongelap Atoll and DOE’s program will provide whole-body counting and plutonium analyses for this population. Whole-body technologies will continue to be the centerpiece of the DOE’s environmental/radiological monitoring program at Majuro, \nEnewetak, & Rongelap. \n Other Health Programs.................................................. 34,841 25,989 20,772\nOther Health Activities include the Former Worker Program, the Worker and Community Public Health Program, the Illness and Injury Surveillance program, International Health Studies program, and funding for the Radiation Emergency Accident Center/Training Site. \nƒOccupational Health................................................. 12,500 13,056 12,363\nThe Former Worker Program supports the Office of Health Studies’ mission and strategic response \nby offering specialized medical screening by external teams of health experts to former workers who may have been exposed to hazardous materials as a result of their work at DOE sites. Participants with significant findings are referred to their personal physicians for further attention, thus promoting early detection and intervention of occupational illnesses, and in some cases, submission of workers compensation claims under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA). In FY 2006, the Former Workers Program continued an expansion of services initiated in FY 2005 to workers not already covered by the original medical screening projects through a combination of new regional projects and a new national supplemental care screening program. In FY 2007, DOE will have implemented program enhancements within this congressionally mandated program to ensure the best and most cost-effective service to the largest number of former workers. The Radiation Emergency Accident Center/Training Site (REAC/TS) maintains the capability to provide rapid response medical expertise and training to address radiological accidents. In FY 2006, REAC/TS reinstitutes the capability to conduct cytogenetic studies to be able to quickly and accurately determine an individual’s radiation dose in the event of a radiological or dirty bomb event. In FY 2007, it is expected that REAC/TS will be certified as a reference cytogenetic biodosimetry laboratory and organize, provide training and quality assurance for a national consortium of clinical laboratories that will be able to provide analyses in the event of a radiological/nuclear incident. \nPage 86 (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nOther Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nHealth Programs FY 2007 Congressional Budget ƒPublic Health............................................................. 6,700 6,621 2,098\nDOE funds the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct health studies and public \nhealth activities relevant to DOE workers and residents of communities neighboring DOE sites \nacross the United States. These activities are conducted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH), and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) through three interagency agreements. In FY 2006, NIOSH communicated results to workers concerning four studies at five DOE sites. Study results provide information that is designed to enhance the understanding of risks associated with radiation-induced health effects to over 800,000 workers. In FY 2006, NCEH concluded an historical environmental dose reconstruction at one of DOE’s major production sites that evaluated the risk to the public of past releases of radiation and chemicals in communities around DOE sites. Results of historical dose reconstructions are used to estimate exposure-related health risks. In FY 2006, ATSDR finalized seven out of eight public health assessments of the Oak Ridge Reservation.In FY 2007, NIOSH will complete a worker mortality study at Fernald, as well as a study that identifies and describes potential external and internal radiation exposures in plutonium workers at \ntwo DOE sites. NCEH will complete a record review of Los Alamos National Laboratory, the last major DOE production site, to determine if an environmental dose reconstruction is warranted; and ATSDR will publish final Public Health Assessments for the Savannah River Site and the Oak Ridge facilities. \nƒEpidemiological Studies............................................ 3,100 3,057 3,056\nEpidemiologic Studies collect both health and exposure data to document and demonstrate effects of \nradiation and other hazards to current DOE workers and the public and to validate current Departmental protection policies. The Illness and Injury Surveillance Program (IISP) evaluates potential health impacts of DOE operations on workers by monitoring the health of current contractor workers at 14 participating DOE sites. In FY 2007, capabilities to more rapidly perform disease outbreak investigations will be enhanced for quicker identification of health concerns in need of immediate attention. The Comprehensive Epidemiologic Data Resource (CEDR) is an electronic data base which allows investigators access to data from studies funded by DOE. The U.S. Uranium and Transuranium Registries (USTUR) provides independent, continuous improvement in DOE’s ability to estimate internal doses attributable to intake of long-lived radioactive materials by studying the distribution and possible biological effects of plutonium and other heavy metals in voluntarily donated human tissues. In FY 2006, USTUR will use its data to refine dosimetry models to account for wounds and effects of chelation therapy. In FY 2007, criteria for standardization of bioassay and health physics databases will be developed for in ternational use. The viability of stored USTUR \ntissue will be assessed for possible use in cellular/genetic studies. \nƒInternational Health Studies.................................... 3,300 3,255 3,255\nThe Russian Health Studies Program was developed to assess worker and public health risks from \nradiation exposure resulting from nuclear weapons production activities in the former Soviet Union. Presently, DOE supports radiation dose reconstruction studies, epidemiologic studies, molecular and radiobiological studies, a tissue repository, and data preservation and integration activities. In FY 2006, researchers will publish cancer risk estimates for Mayak workers and for the residents of \nPage 87 (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nOther Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nHealth Programs FY 2007 Congressional Budget surrounding communities, requested Food and Drug Administration approval for a radiation \nbiomarker blood test and an in vitro diagnostic product, and published a method for computing \nindividual (versus group) past radiation doses for members of communities surrounding Mayak. In \nFY 2007, researchers will have published new data on the radiation dose and cancer risk from \ninhaled plutonium. \nUnder a binational agreement the DOE and the Government of Spain jointly sponsor the Palomares \nProgram. The goals of the program are to provide medical surveillance of exposed population and \nenvironmental monitoring of the area of plutonium contamination due to a USAF aircraft accident over Palomares, Spain, 1966. DOE and the National Cancer Institute jointly sponsor studies to determine adverse health effects from exposure to radiological contamination following the aftermath of the Chernobyl Accident in 1986. In FY 2006, the final planned data collection cycle for the thyroid and leukemia studies will be completed. In FY 2007, the analysis and several publications from the thyroid and leukemia studies will be completed. \nƒCongressionally Directed Activities......................... 9,241 0 0\nFunding for the following projects was directed by Congress in FY 2005 to include: DOE Worker \nRecords Digitization Project in Nevada; medical monitoring at the Gaseous Diffusion Plants at Paducah, Kentucky, Portsmouth, Ohio, and Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Iowa Army Ammunition Plant assistance in collecting requisite medical records and completing claims for workers and retirees; beryllium screening and outreach program for workers employed at vendors in the Worchester, Massachusetts area who supplied beryllium to the Atomic Energy Commission; University of \nWashington’s Former Hanford Production Workers Medical Screening Program; and medical screening for current Hanford tank farm workers consistent with the July 2004 NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluation Report. \nFunding for the following Health projects was directed by Congress in FY 2006 to include: Extend \nmedical screening at the three Gaseous Diffusion Plants ($0.5M); Initiate medical screening at the \nMound Facility in Miamisburg, OH and the Fernald Facility in Harrison, OH ($2.0M); Initiation of \nearly lung cancer detection screening at the Y-12 and X-10 facilities in TN; and for DOE to prioritize funds for the National Center for Environmental Health at Los Alamos and research work at the Health Energy Related Branch at NIOSH ($2.7M). Funding for these projects is contained within the previously discussed Health programs. Additional funding was also directed by Congress in FY 2006 for the DOE Worker Records Digitization Project in Nevada ($4M) and Initiation of the Chernobyl Research and Service Project ($5M). The Department has analyzed how best to satisfy these two activities consistent with EH’s FY 2006 Congressional Budget request and subsequent appropriation. As a result, EH is making use of prior year unobligated balances from the Health Program ($6M) to fund these activities.\n Total, Health............................................................... 54,841 45,837 40,620\nPage 88 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nHealth Programs FY 2007 Congressional Budget Explanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nOther Health Programs \nŶThe National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), five \nprioritized studies targeted for completion will be delayed or aborted including \nthe K-25 Multiple Myeloma Mortality Study and the Fernald Mortality Update. The National Center for Environmental Health, the Los Alamos Historical Document Retrieval Assessment project will experience delays. The Agency for \nToxic Substances and Disease Registry, completion of the Oak Ridge \nReservation and Savannah River Site public he alth assessments will be delayed \nand all health education activities related to DOE sites will be suspended (all planned public meetings and grand rounds at local hospitals to educate the public and local health care providers conce rning the public health assessments PHAs’ \nevaluations will be suspended, all health edu cation materials regarding potential \nhealth risks to the DOE community will not be provided to the Oak Ridge community, and Oak Ridge Health Effects Subcommittee meetings, which provide information on potential health risks to the public, will be cancelled)…… -5,217\nTotal Funding Change, Health Programs................................................................... -5,217\nPage 89 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nEmployee Compensation Program FY 2007 Congressional Budget Employee Compensation Program \nFunding Schedule by Activity \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n \n Employee Compensation Program............................. 42,703 0 4,455 \n Total, Employee Compensation Program .................. . 42,703 0 4,455 \nDescription\nIn FY 2007, the Employee Compensation Program will continue record search activities in support of \nthe Department of Labor's implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) Part E. \nBenefits\nRecord search activities are necessary for employment verification and documentation of exposures to toxic substances as well as information on toxic substances in use at DOE facilities. \nDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n \n Employee Compensation Program................................ 42,703 0 4,455\nThis program will continue record search activities in support of the Department of Labor's \nimplementation of EEOICPA Part E. In FY 2005, Congress passed the Ronald W. Reagan National \nDefense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) which directed that Part D of the original EEOICPA be absolved and established Part E. Record search activities are necessary for employment verification and documentation of exposures to toxic substances as well as information on toxic substances in use at DOE facilities. \nCongressionally Directed Activities................................ 0 0 0\nAdditional funding was also directed by Congress in FY 2006 for the DOE Worker Records Digitization Project in Nevada ($4M) and Initiation of the Chernobyl Research and Service Project ($5M). The Department has analyzed how best to satisfy these two activities consistent with EH’s FY 2006 Congressional Budget request and subsequent appropriation. As a result, EH is making use of prior year unobligated balances from the Employee Compensation Program ($2M) to fund these activities. \n Total, Employee Compensation Program…................. 42,703 0 4,455\nPage 90 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nEmployee Compensation Program FY 2007 Congressional Budget Explanation of Funding Changes\nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nEmployee Compensation Program \nŶBudget request funds record search activities. This activity supports the Department of \nLabor's implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation \nProgram Act (EEOICPA) Part E. Part E programs require employee verification and \nexposure records for implementation. Funding is necessary for Field sites to provide records. FY 2006 will be funded entirely with carryover funding from FY 2005………...\n+4,455\nTotal Funding Change, Employee Compensation Program................................................. +4,455\nPage 91 Page 92 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Program Direction \nFunding Profile by Category \n(dollars in thousands/whole FTEs) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n \n Idaho Operations Office \n Salaries and Benefits........................................................ 318 312 329 \n Travel............................................................................... 6 6 6 \n Other Related Expenses................................................... 1 1 1 \n Total, Idaho Operations Office.......................................... 325 319 336 \n Full Time Equivalents........................................................ 2 2 2 \n \n Radiological and Environm ental Sciences Laboratory \n Salaries and Benefits........................................................ 2,623 2,459 2,585 Travel............................................................................... 47 44 46 \n Other Related Expenses................................................... 5 4 4 \nTotal, Radiological and En vironmental Sciences \nLaboratory......................................................................... 2,675 2,507 2,635 \n Full Time Equivalents........................................................ 17 16 16 \n Headquarters \n Salaries and Benefits........... ................... .................. ........ 16,902 16,200 16,286 \n Travel............................................................................... 287 268 755 \n Other Related Expenses................................................... 62 57 64 \n Total, Headquarters....... .................. .............. ................ ..... 17,251 16,525 17,105 \n Full Time Equivalents........................................................ 112 109 116 \n \n Total Program Direction \n Salaries and Benefits........... ................... .................. ........ 19,843 18,971 19,200 \n Travel............................................................................... 340 318 807 \n Other Related Expenses................................................... 68 62 69 \n Total, Program Direction................................................... 20,251 19,351 20,076 \n Total, Full Time Equivalents............................................. 131 127 134 \nMission\nProgram Direction in the Other Defense Activities account provides overall direction and support for the \nOffice of Environment, Safety and Health (EH) defense programs to ensure that all operations are conducted in the most efficient and effective manner. \nAs stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission. Environment, Safety and Health performs critical functions which directly support the mission of the Department. The Office of Environment, Safety and Health performs critical functions which directly support the mission of the \nPage 93 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Department. These functions include funding for a Federal staff that has the technical expertise to carry \nout the essential EH mission. The EH mission requires experts to develop overall environment, safety, and health policy for DOE sites and facility operations; to provide a central and coordinated source of \nscarce technical expertise to all Field DOE; provide a central clearing house for information, analysis \nand feedback regarding new efforts, present activities, and unforeseen occurrences taking place at the multitude of diverse facilities within the DOE complex; provide the Department with the capability, as well as health studies endeavors; and to perform activities relative to environment, safety, and health \nprograms across the DOE complex. Program Direction includes funding to support RESL and the \nAnalytical Services Program staff; all costs of transportation, subsistence, and incidental expenses for EH’s Federal employees in accordance with Federal Travel Regulations and training for EH Federal staff. \nSignificant Program Shift \nRadiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory – Laboratory functions will be studied for \ncompetition with the private sector. \nDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nSalaries and Benefits.................................................................. 19,843 18,971 19,200\nIncludes funding for full-time permanent and other than full-time permanent employees’ salaries, \novertime pay, cash incentive awards, lump sum leave payments, Senior Executive Service, other performance awards, and payments to the worker’s compensation. \n \nTravel.......................................................................................... 340 318 807\nEH travel requirements are in line with the EH Federal staff levels and currently estimated mission \nessential travel needs. Reflects EH initiative to increase site visits resulting in a substantial increase in \nenvironment, safety and health travel funding. \n \nOther Related Expenses............................................................. 68 62 69\nThis category provides for the essential training activities as well as Working Capital Fund expenditures. The Working Capital Fund covers non-discretionary costs such as space utilization, computer and telephone usage, mail service, supplies and electronic services. Funding also supports \nEH office expenditures for printing and reproduction, telecommunication needs, ADP maintenance and training for Federal staff, including the training course registration fees for EH Federal employees. Provides training and course registration costs for EH employees. \n \nTotal, Program Direction.......................................................... 20,251 19,351 20,076\nPage 94 Other Defense Activities/ \nEnvironment, Safety and Health (defense)/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Explanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nSalaries and Benefits \nƒ\u0003Reflects additional staffing for Nuclear Safety Research Function and reflects \nrestructuring of salary and benefits requirements……………………….………… +229\nTravel\nƒ\u0003Reflects EH initiative to increase site visits resulting in a substantial increase in \nenvironment, safety and health travel funding……………………………...……... +489\n\u0003\nOther Related Expenses \nƒ\u0003Reflects prescribed inflation rate as well as the implementation of one of EH’s \nstrategies in support of its six strategic goals, establishing a culture of continuous learning and employee development through a number of training and educational development techniques and activities……………………………….. +7\nTotal Funding Change, Program Direction………………………………………….. +725 \nOther Related Expenses by Category \n (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nOther Related Expenses \n Training........................................................... 68 62 69 +7 +11.3% \nTotal, Other Related Expenses.......................... 68 62 69 +7 +11.3% \nPage 95 Page 96 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetOther Defense Activities \nOffice of Legacy Management \nOverview \nAppropriation Summary by Program \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2006 FY 2006 \n FY 2005 Current Original FY 2006 Current FY 2007 \n Appropriation Appropria tion Adjustmentsa Appropriation Request \n \nOther Defense Activities \nLegacy Management ....................... 46,520 45,076 -451 44,625 167,851 \nTotal, Other Defense Activities ............ 46,520 45,076 -451 44,625 167,851 \n \nEnergy Supply and Conservation \nLegacy Management ....................... 30,883 33,522 -335 33,187 33,139 \nSubtotal, Energy Supply and \nConservation ......................................... 30,883 33,522 -335 33,187 33,139 \nLess Use of Prior Year Balances..... -266 0 0 0 0 \nTotal, Energy Supply and \nConservation ......................................... 30,617 33,522 -335 33,187 33,139 \n \nTotal, Other Defense Activities and \nEnergy Supply and Conservation.......... 77,137 78,598 -786 77,812 200,990 \nPreface\nDuring FY 2007, the Department continues its efforts to reduce risk to human health and the \nenvironment at its contaminated sites and manage its pension and benefit responsibilities for former \ncontractor personnel. By conducting the long-term surveillance and maintenance of remediated sites and ensuring pension and benefit continuity, the Office of Legacy Management allows Environmental Management to concentrate on further risk reduction and site closure. \nWithin the Energy and Water, Other Defense Activities appropriation, the Office of Legacy \nManagement (LM) has one program: Legacy Management. \nThis Overview will describe Strategic Context, Mission, Benefits, Strategic Goals, and Funding by \nGeneral Goals. These items together put the appropriation in perspective. The Annual Performance \nResults and Targets, Means and Strategies, and Validation and Verification sections address how the goals will be achieved and how performance will be measured. Finally, this Overview will address Significant Program Shifts. \nStrategic Context \nFollowing publication of the Administration’s National Energy Policy, the Department developed a \nStrategic Plan that defines its mission, four strategic goals for accomplishing that mission, and seven \n \na Reflects a 1 percent rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address \nHurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006 \nPage 97 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional Budgetgeneral goals to support the strategic goals. Each appropriation has developed quantifiable goals to \nsupport the general goals. Thus, the “goal cascade” is the following: \nDepartment Mission ĺ Strategic Goal (25 yrs) ĺ General Goal (10-15 yrs) ĺ Program Goal (GPRA \nUnit) (10-15 yrs) \nTo provide a concrete link between budget, performance, and reporting, the Department developed a \n“GPRA Unit” concept. Within DOE, a GPRA Unit defines a major activity or group of activities that \nsupport the core mission and aligns resources with specific goals. Each GPRA Unit has completed or will complete a Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). A unique program goal was developed for each GPRA Unit. A numbering scheme has been established for tracking performance and reporting. \nThe goal cascade accomplishes two things. First, it ties major activities for each program to successive \ngoals and, ultimately, to DOE’s mission. This helps ensure the Department focuses its resources on \nfulfilling its mission. Second, the cascade allows DOE to track progress against quantifiable goals and to tie resources to each goal at any level in the cascade. Thus, the cascade facilitates the integration of budget and performance information in support of the GRPA and the President’s Management Agenda (PMA).\nMission\nThe mission of the Office of Legacy Management is to manage the department’s post-closure \nresponsibilities and ensure the future protection of human health and the environment. This Office has control and custody for legacy lands, structures, and facilities and is responsible for maintaining them at levels suitable for their long-term use. \nBenefits\nThe greatest benefit of the Office of Legacy Management is to serve as a visible demonstration of the \nDepartment’s resolve to honor its responsibilities for the communities near its remediated facilities and \nfor the former contractor work force. \nThe Office of Legacy Management programs provide benefits to the Department following mission \nchange or site closure. For sites where cleanup is completed, Legacy Management programs ensure that the remediation measures implemented during closure are protecting human health and the environment, that labor responsibilities for the contractor work force are being satisfied, and that other Departmental legacy responsibilities are met. By managing the real and personal property assets that remain after cleanup and closure, Legacy Management helps the Department reduce the magnitude of its physical resource management, the costs associated with such management, and actively promotes the beneficial reuse of those mission excess properties. \nStrategic, General, and Program Goals \nThe Department’s Strategic Plan identifies four strategic goals (one each for defense, energy, science, \nand environmental aspects of the mission plus seven general goals that tie to the strategic goals. The Other Defense Activities appropriation supports the following goal: \nEnvironment Strategic Goal: To protect the environment by providing a responsible resolution to the \nenvironmental legacy of the Cold War and by providing for the permanent disposal of high-level radioactive waste. \nPage 98 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetGeneral Goal 6, Environmental Management: Accelerate cleanup of nuclear weapons manufacturing \nand testing sites, completing cleanup of 108 contaminated sites by 2025. \nThe programs funded within the Other Defense Activities appropriation have one Program Goal that \ncontributes to the General Goal in the “goal cascade”. This goal is: \nProgram Goal 06.26.00.00: Legacy Management – By 2015, the Office of legacy Management will be \nresponsible for: the cost effective management of land, structures, facilities and/or records for over 120 \nsites; employee benefits for the Department’s former contractor work force at seven sites; and the disposal of real property at five sites.\nContribution to General Goal\nWithin the Program Goal for the Legacy Management program, there are four subgoals that contribute \nto the general goal. These subgoals are: \nƒProtect human health and the environment through effective and efficient long-term surveillance and \nmaintenance – Activities associated with this subgoal contribute to the general goal by managing the long-term surveillance and maintenance at sites where remediation has been essentially completed, allowing the Environmental Management program to concentrate its efforts on continuing to accelerate cleanup and site closure resulting in reduced risks to human health and the environment and reduced landlord costs.\nƒPreserve, protect, and make accessible legacy records and information – These activities assist the other activities by providing a central records management capability. This work directly supports the administration of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) and is responsive to Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act requests. This enables more efficient operation of the other activities and is needed to defend the Department against future liability claims. \nƒSupport an effective and efficient work force structured to accomplish Departmental missions and assure contractor worker pension and medical benefits – The Legacy Management program manages the Department’s labor relations and oversees some pension and benefit programs to meet the Department’s contractual commitments. By managing these activities, the Office of Legacy Management enables the Office of Environmental Management to focus on further risk reduction by remediating other sites. \nƒManage legacy land and assets, emphasizing protective real and personal property reuse and disposition – These activities promote more efficient management of remediated resources. This allows more resources to be focused on further risk reduction. \nPage 99 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetFunding by General and Program Goal \n (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nGeneral Goal 6 \nGeneral Goal 6, Environmental Management Program Goal \n06.26.00.00, Legacy Management ............................................................ 33,425 31,107 156,790 \nSubtotal, General Goal 6 (Other Defense Activities) ..................................... 33,425 31,107 156,790 \n \nAll Other \nProgram Direction..................................................................................... 13,095 13,518 11,061 \n \nTotal, General Goal 6 (Other Defense Activities) .......................................... 46,520 44,625 167,851 \nPage 100 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetAnnual Performance Results and Targets \nFY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nGeneral Goal 6, Environmental Mangement \nLegacy Management Program/Legacy Management \n \n \n Ensure continued effectiveness of \ncleanup remedies through surveillance \nand maintenance activities at Pinellas and Maxey Flats in accordance with \nlegal agreements Ensure continued \neffectiveness of cleanup \nremedies through surveillance and maintenance activities at \nfive sites in accordance with \nlegal agreements Maintain the protectiveness of \ninstalled environmental remedies \nthrough inspections and other \nactions at 100 percent of sites \nwithin LM’s responsibility. \nSupported local community transition activities that created \nor retained 27,500 to 29,000 private sector jobs by the end \nof FY 2002 Supported local community transition activities that \ncreated or retained 29,000 to \n30,500 private sector jobs by \nthe end of FY 2003 Supported local community transition activities that created \nor retained 30,500 to 31,000 \nprivate sector jobs by the end \nof FY 2004 \n \n \n No comparable measures in FY 2005. \nA baseline of program direction \ndivided by the total appropriation \n(excluding Congressionally Directed \nActivities) is 20.6 percentReduce the ratio of program \ndirection to the appropriation \nby 1 percent from the FY \n2005 baseline\n Reduce the cost of performing \nlong-term surveillance and \nmaintenance activities by 2\npercent while meeting all \nregulatory requirements. Base is \nprevious year’s costs less \ninflation rate, costs for new sites, \nand one-time actions.\n \n \nPage 101 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetMeans and Strategies \nThe Legacy Management Program will use various means and strategies to achieve its program goal. \nHowever, various external factors may impact the ability to achieve the goal. The program also \nperforms collaborative activities to help meet its goal. \nThe Department will implement the following means: \nƒLong-term surveillance and maintenance will be performed in accordance with the regulatory \ndecisions for each site. Activities range from maintaining records to routine inspections and maintenance at sites where remediation measures are substantially completed. \nƒAdequate staffing will be maintained to oversee the program. A large portion of the surveillance \nand maintenance and payment of the contractor pensions and benefits will be performed by \ncontractors.\nThe Department will implement the following strategies: \nƒThe Office of Legacy Management (LM) will only accept responsibility for sites where remediation \nhas been substantially completed. \nThe following external factors could affect LM’s ability to achieve its strategic goal: \nƒSignificant changes in remedy performance could cause the site to be returned to EM for further \nremediation. \nIn conducting the program’s surveillance and maintenance functions, LM performs the following collaborative activities: \nƒEvaluation of remedy performance, as determined by surveillance and maintenance activities, is \ncoordinated with regulators, local communities, and other stakeholders. \nValidation and Verification \nThe Department is operating a performance tracking system to measure performance. The Office of the \nChief Financial Officer has developed action plans for the primary functions. Quarterly updates for sites where surveillance and maintenance has been conducted are reported using an automated system. \nFor payments of medical benefits or other activities not tracked by the automated system, the Office of \nLegacy Management will obtain quarterly updates to judge progress of the programs. \nThe Legacy Management program has not performed a Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) \nevaluation to date but such a review and the measures resulting from it would also provide verification. \nThe observed results of surveillance and maintenance activities will be documented as annual inspection \nand compliance reports and retained as long as specified in Federal requirements for records retention. To validate and verify program performance, LM will conduct various internal and external reviews and audits. LM’s programmatic activities are subject to continuing reviews by the Congress, the \nPage 102 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetGovernment Accountability Office, the Department’s Inspector General, the U.S. Environmental \nProtection Agency, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, state environmental and health agencies, and the Department’s Office of Engineering and Construction Management. Additionally, LM Headquarters senior management staff conduct quarterly, in-depth reviews of cost, schedule, and scope to ensure projects are on-track and within budget. \nSignificant Policy or Program Shifts \nƒBy the start of FY 2007, the Office of Environmental Management (EM) will have completed active \ncleanup of several major sites throughout the Department of Energy complex. Management of these \nsites will be transferred to the Office of Legacy Management (LM). Management activities will include legacy functions of long-term surveillance and maintenance, long-term response actions, oversight and management of pension and benefit payments for former contractor retirees, and records management. The cumulative effect of these transfers will result in an increase of the LM budget by approximately 150 percent. However, this increase in the LM budget will be matched by a corresponding decrease in the EM budget.\n- The largest transfer will be for the Rocky Flats site near Denver, CO. Active cleanup will be \ncompleted and all other activities except for legacy function at this major site have ended. At this site, LM will be managing all activities identified above. \n- The Fernald Site near Cincinnati, OH, is another major transfer. Like Rocky Flats, active \ncleanup will be completed and LM will be managing all the legacy functions identified above. \n- A group of sites known collectively as the Nevada offsites, will be also be a major transfer. The \nsites involved in this category are: Amchitka site, AK; Rio Blanco and Rulison sites, CO; Gasbuggy and Gnome-Coach sites, NM; Salmon site, MS; and Project Shoal and Central Nevada Test Area, NV. LM will be managing the legacy functions of long-term surveillance and management, long-term response actions, and records management for these sites. There are no pension or benefit payments involved for any of these sites. \nƒAt the same time that the program magnitude is significantly increasing, the Office of Legacy Management (LM) is involved in an internal evaluation of its own management needs. LM is evaluating the anticipated work load from the increased activities and its existing skill mix in an effort to effectively manage its activities. So far, this review has resulted in significant efficiencies for FY 2007 from FY 2006, despite the increase in the program scope and magnitude. \nƒTo accommodate the records management functions, the FY 2007 request supports the centralization of Legacy Archives and Information activities from various sites across the country to a single location to ensure a more streamlined management approach. \nPage 103 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Overview FY 2007 Congressional BudgetFacilities Maintenance and Repair \nThe Department’s Facilities Maintenance and Repair activities are tied to its programmatic missions, \ngoals, and objectives. Facilities Maintenance and Repair activities funded by this budget are displayed below.\nDirect Funded Maintenance and Repair \n(dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nLegacy Management \nLegacy Management \nFernald Site........................................................................ 0 0 300 \nMorgantown Office ........................................................... 0 0 768 \nNevada Offsites ................................................................. 0 0 738 \nRocky Flats Field Office ................................................... 0 0 406 \n \nTotal, Legacy Management..................................................... 0 0 2,212 \nTotal, Direct-Funded Mainte nance and Repair (Other Defense \nActivities)...................................................................................... 0 0 2,212 \nPage 104 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Funding by Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetOther Defense Activities\nOffice of Legacy Management \nFunding by Site by Program \n(dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nFernald Site....................................................................................... 0 0 26,521 \nGrand Junction Office....................................................................... 11,284 11,135 12,473 Morgantown Office .......................................................................... 7,936 0 8,860 Mound Plant...................................................................................... 3,968 0 0 \nPinellas Plant .................................................................................... 7,688 7,527 7,623 \nRocky Flats Field Office................................................................... 496 0 90,754 Washington Headquarters................................................................. 15,148 25,963 21,620 \n \nTotal, Other Defense Activities ........................................................ 46,520 44,625 167,851 \nMajor Changes or Shifts by Site \nRocky Flats Field Office \nMore than half of the Legacy Management budget increase can be attributed to the transfer of \nresponsibilities at the Rocky Flats site. By FY 2007, the Office of Legacy Management will have the responsibility for long-term surveillance and maintenance and pension and benefit continuity for former contractor employees at the former Rocky Flats site. The management of long-term surveillance and maintenance will be directed by personnel at the Rocky Flats site and in the Grand Junction Office and the pension and benefit continuity will be overseen by personnel at the Rocky Flats Office and in \nWashington Headquarters. \nFernald Site \nBy FY 2007, the Office of Legacy Management will have responsibility for long-term surveillance and \nmaintenance, pension and benefit continuity for former contractor employees, and records management \nfor the Fernald, OH, site. The long-term surveillance and maintenance will be directed by personnel in Ohio and in the Grand Junction Office, the pension and benefit continuity will be overseen by personnel in Washington headquarters, and the records will be centrally managed by personnel in the Morgantown, WV, Office. \nGrand Junction Office \nBy FY 2007, the Grand Junction LM Office will add long-term surveillance and maintenance \nresponsibilities for the Nevada Offsites.\nMorgantown Office \nDuring FY 2007, the office will begin transferring records from various locations and will initiate \ncentralized archival, retrieval, and other archive management functions. Record keeping for the transferred Columbus, OH, site will also be included. \nPage 105 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Funding by Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetSite Description \nFernald Site \nThe Fernald site is located in southern Ohio and is one of the facilities targeted by the Office of \nEnvironmental Management for closure in FY 2006. Funding in FY 2007 will be for the purposes of \nlong-term surveillance and maintenance and post-closure contractor retiree pensions and benefits. \nGrand Junction Office \nThe Grand Junction Office is located in western Colorado. The oversight of the long-term surveillance \nand maintenance program at sites distributed throughout the Western states is the staff’s primary \nfunction. The long-term surveillance and maintenance activities managed from this office include \nenvironmental monitoring, long-term treatment of contaminants, maintaining site security, and asset disposition. During FY 2007, in addition to surveillance and maintenance activities, preparation for transferring the Mound site from Environmental Management to Legacy Management will also occur. \nMorgantown Office \nThe Morgantown Office is located in Morgantown, WV. Program functions that are the focus of staff at \nthat location include long-term surveillance and maintenance activities in the Eastern and Midwestern states and, beginning in FY 2007, legacy archives and information management activities to support the missions of the Office of Legacy Management. During FY 2005 and FY 2006, design, site selection, land acquisition, and construction of a records storage facility were major work elements. \nMound Plant \nThe Mound Plant is one of the facilities targeted by the Office of Environmental Management for \nclosure in FY 2007. Successful site cleanup will result in the closure and turnover of 24 buildings and 306 acres to the Miamisburg-Mound Community Improvement Corporation for private sector development. \nPinellas Plant \nThe Pinellas Site is a former weapons facility located in Pinellas, FL, which is in the Tampa-St. \nPetersburg metropolitan area. The facility has been completely closed and the property sold to the local community reuse organization. The Legacy Management program provides pension and benefits payments for the former contractor work force as well as assisted the community reuse organization as a focal point to stabilize the local economy. A portion of the funding in FY 2005 (approximately $ 1.2M) was for assistance for the community reuse organization. \nRocky Flats Field Office \nThe Rocky Flats facility is located about ten miles north of Golden, CO. It is one of the facilities \ntargeted by the Office of Environmental Management for closure in FY 2006. Funding in FY 2005 was to assist in forming a Local Stakeholder Organization for that facility. Funding in FY 2007 will be for the purposes of long-term surveillance and maintenance and post-closure contractor retiree pensions and benefits.\nPage 106 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Funding by Site FY 2007 Congressional BudgetWashington Headquarters \nIntroduction\nThe Office of Legacy Management has been organized as a Headquarters office with personnel located \nin the Washington, DC area, Denver and Grand Junction, CO, Morgantown, WV, and Pittsburgh, PA. \nWashington Headquarters \nThe Office of Legacy Management Washington headquarters staff have primary management \nresponsibility for program direction and for some program activities. Program activities include \ninvestigating mechanisms to manage retiree pensions and benefits and administering the funding for the environmental justice program. \nPage 107 Page 108 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Legacy Management FY 2007 Congressional BudgetLegacy Management \nFunding Profile by Subprogram \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 \nCurrent\nAppropriation FY 2006 \nOriginal \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nAdjustmentsaFY 2006 \nCurrent\nAppropriation FY 2007 \nRequest \n \nLegacy Management \nLegacy Management ...................... 33,425 31,421 -314 31,107 156,790 \nProgram Direction.......................... 13,095 13,655 -137 13,518 11,061 \nTotal, Legacy Management Program... 46,520 45,076 -451 44,625 167,851 \nPublic Law Authorizations: \nPublic Law 95-91, “Department of Energy Organization Act (1977) \nPublic Law 103-62, Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 \nPublic Law 106-377, Energy and Water Development Appropria tions Act, 2001 \nPublic Law 106-398, National Defense Aut horization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 \nPublic Law 107-66, Energy and Water Development Appropria tions Act, 2002 \nPublic Law 107-314, Bob Stump National Defens e Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 \nPublic Law 108-136, National Defense Aut horization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 \nPublic Law 108-375, Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 \nPublic Law 109-163, National Defense Aut horization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 \nMission\nThe mission of the Office of Legacy Management is to manage the Department’s post-closure \nresponsibilities and ensure the future protection of human health and the environment. This Office has \ncontrol and custody for legacy land, structure, and facilities and is responsible for maintaining them at levels suitable for their long-term use. The activities that are used to accomplish this mission include: (1) conduct long-term surveillance and maintenance (also referred to as long-term stewardship) at DOE facilities where remediation measures have been substantially completed; (2) oversee the management \nof pensions and benefits for former contractor employees; (3) perform storage, retrieval, and management of all records necessary for legacy management activities, (4) administer the Environmental Justice program, and, (5) dispose of assets no longer needed for the Department’s missions. \nBeginning in FY 2005, the cost of conducting External Independent Reviews (EIRs) for Capital Asset \nProjects greater than $5 million within the Legacy Management Program, have been funded by this program. Examples of EIRs include conducting Performance Baseline EIRs prior to Critical Decision-2 (CD-2) to verify the accuracy of cost and schedule baseline estimates and conducting Construction/ Execution Readiness EIRs, which are done for all Major System projects prior to CD-3. These funds, which are managed by the Office of Engineering and Construction Management, are exclusively used for EIRs directly related to these projects funded within the Legacy Management program. Beginning \n \na Reflects a 1 percent rescission in accordance with P.L. 109-148, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address \nHurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006 \nPage 109 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Legacy Management FY 2007 Congressional Budgetin FY 2007, the EIR business line will be financed via the Working Capital fund to achieve parity on \nhow EIRs are funded and to standardize the administration of these critical activities. \nBenefits\nThe Legacy Management program contains important elements to assist the Office of Environmental \nManagement achieve the strategic goal of providing a resolution to the environmental legacy of the Cold War. As the Office of Environmental Management completes its cleanup activities, certain aspects of the Department’s responsibilities remain. These activities include: long-term groundwater pump and treat operations, remedy surveillance and maintenance, records management, and long-term retirement \npension and benefits for contractor personnel. A long-term commitment to manage the resources and activities beyond the completion of active remediation is required. The activities of the Legacy Management program ensure that these Departmental responsibilities are addressed and the Office of Environmental Management is able to concentrate its efforts on cleanup and risk reduction. \nFY 2005 Achievements \nƒConducted required site inspections and other reviews at all sites specified in legal, regulatory, and \nother agreements. \nƒAssumed responsibility for the following Environmental Management sites: General Atomics, University of Missouri Research Reactor, Project Chariot, and Geothermal Test Facility. \nPage 110 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Legacy Management FY 2007 Congressional BudgetLegacy Management \nFunding Schedule by Activity \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nLegacy Management \nLong-Term Surveillance and Maintenance.................................. 11,284 11,136 26,525 \nPension and Benefit Continuity ................................................... 7,986 19,407 120,747 \nLegacy Archives Management..................................................... 0 0 8,860 \nEnvironmental Justice.................................................................. 565 564 658 Congressionally Directed Activity............................................... 13,590 0 0 \n \nTotal, Legacy Management ............................................................... 33,425 31,107 156,790 \nDescription\nThe objectives of the Legacy Management subprogram are to conduct long-term surveillance and \nmaintenance (also referred to as long-term stewardship) at DOE facilities where remediation measures \nhave been substantially completed, oversee the management of pensions and benefits for former contractor employees, perform storage, retrieval, and management of all records necessary for legacy management activities, and administer the environmental justice program. These activities are performed for the purpose of supporting the Department’s commitments contained in records of \ndecision, contracts, and legal agreements. \nBenefits\nThe Legacy Management subprogram contains the essential elements to assist the Office of \nEnvironmental Management achieve the strategic goal of providing a resolution to the environmental legacy of the Cold War and ensure that the Department fulfills its long-term commitments to protect the environment and to ensure continuity of benefits to former contractor workers. By funding the long-term activities in the Legacy Management program, the Office of Environmental Management is able to concentrate its resources on risk reduction and site closure. \nPage 111 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Legacy Management FY 2007 Congressional BudgetDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nLong-Term Surveillance and Maintenance..................... 11,284 11,136 26,525\nThe funding requested for FY 2007 will allow the Office of Legacy Management (LM) to monitor and \nconduct long-term treatment of 14 sites in accordance with legal, contractual, and regulatory agreements. Functions include soil, water, and air monitoring, long-term treatment of contaminants, maintenance of contaminant treatment structures, and maintaining security for the sites and other resources associated with the sites. Activities associated with preparation for transfer of additional sites are also included. \nƒFernald Site .................................................................. 0 0 10,269\nThe Fernald Site consists of the former Fernald facility. Responsibility for this site will be \ntransferred at the beginning of FY 2007 from the Office of Environmental Management. Funding in FY 2007 will allow LM to monitor and conduct long-term surveillance and maintenance activities.\nƒNevada Offsites ............................................................ 0 0 5,081\nThe Nevada Offsites consist of eight individual sites, mostly located in the Western States. \nResponsibility for those sites will be transferred at the beginning of FY 2007 from the Office of Environmental Management. Funding in FY 2007 will allow LM to monitor and conduct long-term surveillance and maintenance activities at these sites. \nƒRocky Flats ................................................................... 0 0 3,783\nThe funding requested for FY 2007 will allow the LM to monitor and conduct long-term treatment \nat the Rocky Flats site. Responsibility for this site will be transferred at the beginning of FY 2007 from the Office of Environmental Management. Functions include soil, water, and air monitoring, and maintaining security for the site and other resources associate with the site. \nƒOther Defense Sites...................................................... 11,284 11,136 7,392\nThe Office of Legacy Management also manages long-term surveillance and maintenance activities \nat five other sites and is preparing for transfer of additional sites. The funding for FY 2007 will allow LM to conduct those activities. \nPension and Benefit Continuity ........................................ 7,986 19,407 120,747\nƒFernald Site .................................................................. 0 0 16,252\nAt the start of FY 2007, the Office of Legacy Management will receive responsibility for ensuring \ncontinuity of pensions and benefits for contractor retirees. This funding request will include pensions, medical benefits, life insurance, and Medicare Part B payments. \nƒPinellas .......................................................................... 6,498 7,527 7,623\nThis project provides payments to former contractor employees pursuant to administration of DOE \nliabilities associated with contractor employee retirement benefits. \nPage 112 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Legacy Management FY 2007 Congressional Budget (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nƒRocky Flats ................................................................... 0 0 86,972\nAt the start of FY 2007, the Office of Legacy Management will receive responsibility for ensuring \ncontinuity of pensions and benefits for contractor retirees. This funding request will include pensions, medical benefits, life insurance, and Medicare Part B payments.\nƒClosure Sites Pension and Benefit Administration... 1,488 11,880 9,900\nFunding for this activity will support a management and delivery system to conduct the functions \nnecessary to provide retiree benefits to former contractor employees from Rocky Flats. \nLegacy Archives Management......................................... 0 0 8,860\nThe activity of Records Management satisfies the office goal to preserve, protect, and make accessible \nlegacy records and information. The funding for this activity will provide for archiving, retrieval, \nduplicating, and other functions associated with storing and retrieving records in accordance with NARA standards. During FY 2007, the records management facility in Morgantown, WV, will become operational and LM will consolidate there records currently stored in various locations. \nThese records must be available and retrievable within respective timeframes for Freedom of \nInformation Act (FOIA), Privacy Act (PA), and Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act (EEOICPA) inquiries. The archive management activities will permit ready access to the respective records in the most cost-effective manner. \nThis amount also includes $728 thousand for repair and maintenance of the records facility. \nEnvironmental Justice....................................................... 565 564 658\nFunding allows the Department to manage a program to promote environmental justice as specified by \nExecutive Order 12898, issued on February 11, 1994. This program provides assistance for a variety of activities that include: grants to communities to address environmental subjects using expertise from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU’s); an intern program through the United Negro College Fund; a cooperative agreement with the National Conference of Black Mayors to provide assistance on environmental issues; and a Community Capacity Building Program to provide assistance to enable communities around DOE sites to address environmental issues.\nCongressionally Directed Activities ................................. 13,590 0 0\nThere were a total of three Congressionally Directed activities funded in FY 2005. The program does \nnot request funding in FY 2007 for these activities. The following activities were directed by Congress in FY 2005 to be included in this program: \nƒLocal Stakeholder Organization................................. 496 0 0\nThis organization would serve as a focal point for interested parties following the closure of the \nRocky Flats facility. \nPage 113 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Legacy Management FY 2007 Congressional Budget (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nƒRecords Management .................................................. 7,936 0 0\nThe Office of Legacy Management will oversee site selection and facility construction. The \nfacility is scheduled to be completed in time to receive records from the three major EM closure \nsites (Rocky Flats, Fernald, and Mound).\nƒCommunity Transition ................................................ 5,158 0 0\nThere were two sites in FY 2005 to receive funding to assist their respective community reuse \norganizations: the Pinellas Plant in Pinellas, FL, and the Mound Plant in Miamisburg, OH.\n \nTotal, Legacy Management............................................... 33,425 31,107 156,790\nExplanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nLong-Term Surveillance and Maintenance\nƒFernald Site \nThese sites will be transferred to the Office of Legacy Management at the \nbeginning of FY 2007. There is a corresponding decrease in the budget for the \nOffice of Environmental Management........................................................................ 10,269\nƒNevada Offsites \nThese sites will be transferred to the Office of Legacy Management at the beginning of FY 2007. There is a corresponding decrease in the budget for the \nOffice of Environmental Management....................................................................... 5,081\nƒRocky Flats \nThis site will be transferred to the Office of Legacy Management at the beginning of FY 2007. There is a corresponding decrease in the budget for the Office of \nEnvironmental Management ...................................................................................... 3,783\nƒOther Defense Sites \nThis category had included funding in FY 2006 and earlier years to prepare for the \ntransfer of Rocky Flats from EM to LM. These preparations will be completed in \nFY 2007 when the management of that site is transferred to LM. The decrease offsets the additional long-term surveillance and maintenance costs of other sites also transferred to LM ................................................................................................ -3,744\nTotal, Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance...................................................... 15,389\nPage 114 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Legacy Management FY 2007 Congressional BudgetFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nPension and Benefit Continuity \nƒFernald Site \nAt the beginning of FY 2007, the Office of Legacy Management will receive \nresponsibility for continuity of pensions and benefits for former contractor retirees. \nThere is a corresponding decrease in the budget for the Office of Environmental Management ............................................................................................................... 16,25 2\nƒPinellas Contractor Medical Benefits \nNo significant change................................................................................................. 96\nƒRocky Flats \nAt the beginning of FY 2007, the Office of Legacy Management will receive \nresponsibility for continuity of pensions and benefits for former contractor retirees. There is a corresponding decrease in the budget for the Office of Environmental Management ............................................................................................................... 86,97 2\nƒClosure Sites Pension and Benefit Administration\nDuring FY 2006, Legacy Management will investigate contractual mechanisms for \npension and benefit continuity. Funding in FY 2007 will fund actual pension and \nbenefit administration costs........................................................................................ -1,980\nTotal, Pension and Benefit Continuity......................................................................... 101,340\nLegacy Archives Management \nFunding will pay for consolidating records into the records storage facility and \ninitiating processes for efficiently accessing stored records. While LM has managed \nrecords and information since its inception, the costs are sufficiently large that it is now identified as a separate activity........................................................................................ 8,860\nEnvironmental Justice \nNo significant change ...................................................................................................... 94\nTotal Funding Change, Legacy Management ............................................................. 125,683\nPage 115 Page 116 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional BudgetProgram Direction \nFunding Profile by Category\n (dollars in thousands/whole FTEs) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nHeadquarters \nSalaries and Benefits ..................................................................... 9,480 9,959 7,794\nTravel............................................................................................. 637 634 594\nSupport Services............................................................................ 1,758 1,722 1,414\nOther Related Expenses................................................................. 1,220 1,203 1,259\nTotal, Headquarters ............................................................................. 13,095 13,518 11,061\nFull Time Equivalents ......................................................................... 72 81 70\nMission\nProgram direction provides the Federal staffing resources and associated costs required to provide \noverall direction and execution of Office of Legacy Management functions. The staff of the Office of Legacy Management are all Headquarters employees, but primarily located in Washington, DC area, Grand Junction, Colorado, and Morgantown, West Virginia. \nAs stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission. The Office of Legacy Management performs critical functions which directly support the mission of the Department. These \nfunctions include but are not limited to long-term surveillance and maintenance, overseeing \nmanagement of pensions and benefits for former contractor personnel, legacy archives management, managing information technology, ensuring sound legal advice and fiscal stewardship, developing and implementing uniform program policy and procedures, maintaining and supporting our work force, safeguarding our work spaces, and providing Congressional and public liaison. \nDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nSalaries and Benefits .................................................................... 9,480 9,959 7,794\nPersonnel are responsible for conducting surveillance and maintenance activities for a variety of DOE \nsites, many situated in remote locations. Although Legacy Management is a headquarters function, there are personnel stationed in Grand Junction, CO, and Morgantown, WV. A major portion of the\nPage 117 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nworkload for the personnel in Grand Junction is involved with oversight of the surveillance and \nmaintenance at approximately 70 sites. The personnel at Morgantown also assist in the surveillance and maintenance functions and are the focal point of records management. \nStaff will work to ensure that the required monitoring actions are performed to protect the environment \nand the public’s health and safety in the vicinity of the sites transferred to Legacy Management from Environmental Management where remediation has been completed. Further, in other program activities, they will: (1) ensure that pension and other post-retirement payments that honor the Department’s responsibilities for former contractor personnel are made; (2) oversee actions to achieve \napproximately 1,000 prime contractor changes per year; (3) work to streamline the approval of work \nforce restructuring plans and develop and implement policies to integrate contract reform mechanisms; (4) provide oversight of upcoming labor negotiations at four sites; and, (5) perform additional functions, such as maintaining records for FUSRAP considered sites, reviewing Departmental liability for CERCLA claims, and administering the environmental justice program within the Department. \nTravel......................................................................................... 637 634 594\nTravel will enable staff to conduct necessary surveillance and maintenance functions, oversight, and \nrelated activities. \nSupport Services....................................................................... 1,758 1,722 1,414\nSupport services will assist in the surveillance and maintenance activities, the logistics of payments to \nformer contractor personnel, and in the preparation of both routine and extraordinary analyses and reports as needed. \nOther Related Expenses.......................................................... 1,220 1,203 1,259\nThe amount in this category consists mainly of the working capital fund/infrastructure costs. Space \nrental, telephones, copiers and printing, computer support, general office supplies, and mailing costs are included in these expenses. The working capital fund costs are proportionate to the number of employees. Other expenses are for items not encompassed by the working capital fund, e.g., computer software.\nThis category also includes funding for a portion of the maintenance and repair costs for the records \nfacility in Morgantown, WV. \nTotal, Program Direction ....................................................... 13,095 13,518 11,061\nPage 118 Other Defense Activities/ \nLegacy Management/ Program Direction FY 2007 Congressional BudgetExplanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nSalaries and Benefits \nChange reflects a transfer of 3 FTEs and a further reduction of 8 additional FTEs – \ndespite the increased work load of additional sites – and a restructuring of the office \nwork force to a lower average grade .................................................................................. -2,165\nTravel\nNo significant change......................................................................................................... -40\nSupport Services \nCompletion of the worker and community transition activities and completion of the \npreparations for site transfers has reduced the need for some computer services and some support contractors.................................................................................................... -308\nOther Related Expenses \nThe “other related expenses” include $40 thousand for the repair and maintenance costs \nfor the records management facility in Morgantown, WV, associated with office space..56\nTotal Funding Change, Program Direction................................................................... -2,457\nSupport Services by Category\n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nAutomated Data Processing.................................... 300 333 50 -283 -85.0%\nManpower Systems Analyses .................................. 210 420 420 0 0.0%\nTraining and Education............................................ 150 100 100 0 0.0%Analysis of DOE Management Processes................ 100 200 200 0 0.0%Reports and Analyses Management and General \nAdministrative Services........................................... 998 669 644 -25 -3.7%\nTotal, Support Services............................................ 1,758 1,722 1,414 -308 -17..9%\nOther Related Expenses \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nWorking Capital Fund ............................................. 1,071 1,059 1,067 8 0.8% \nRecords Storage Facility Repair and Maintenance.. 0 0 40 40 -- \nOther ........................................................................ 149 144 152 8 5.6% \nTotal, Other Related Expenses ................................ 1,220 1,203 1,259 56 4.7% \nPage 119 Page 120 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nOverview FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Other Defense Activities \nOffice of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology \nOverview \nAppropriation Summary by Program\n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 Current \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nOriginal \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nAdjustments FY 2006 \nCurrent \nAppropriation FY 2007 \nRequest \nOther Defense Activities \nInfrastructure \nIdaho Facilities \nManagement......................... . 20,719a 17,762b -178c 17,584 0d\nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards \nand Security ......................... . 57,662 75,008 -720e 74,288 75,949 \nTotal, Infrastructure .................. . 78,381 92,770 -898 91,872 75,949 \nSpent Nuclear Fuel \nManagement.............................. . 1,488 0 +0 0 0 \nProgram Direction..................... . 33,587f 31,103g -311h 30,792 0i\nSubtotal, Other Defense Activities.......................................\n. 113,456 123,873 -1,209 122,664 75,949 \nLess Security Charge for Reimbursable Work ..................\n. -3,003 -3,003 +0 -3,003 -3,003 \nTotal, Other Defense Activities .... . 110,453 120,870 -1,209 119,661 72,946 \na Excludes $91,434,000 appropriated und er Energy Supply and Conser vation appropriation, a $167,000 rescission and \n$10,000,000 from Naval Reactors. \nb Excludes $82,600,000 originally appropriated under Energy Su pply and Conservation appropriation and $13,500,000 from \nNaval Reactors. \nc Includes a rescission of $177,62 0 in accordance with P.L. 10 9-148, Emergency Supplemen tal Appropriations to Address \nHurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006. \nd Beginning in FY 2007, funding for Idaho Facilities Management is requested under Energy Supply and Conservation \nappropriation. \ne Includes a rescission of $720,05 0 in accordance with P.L. 10 9-148, Emergency Supplemen tal Appropriations to Address \nHurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006. \nf Excludes $26,218,000 appropriated under Energy Supply and Conservation ap propriation and a $271,000 rescission. \ng Excludes $30,006,000 originally appropriated un der Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation. \nh Includes a rescission of $311,03 0 in accordance with P.L. 10 9-148, Emergency Supplemen tal Appropriations to Address \nHurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006. \ni Beginning in FY 2007, funding for Program Direction is re quested under Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation. \nPage 121 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nOverview FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Preface\nThe Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology (NE) leads the Government’s efforts to develop \nnew nuclear energy generation technologies to meet energy and climate goals, to develop advanced, proliferation-resistant nuclear fuel technologies that maximize energy from nuclear fuel, and to maintain and enhance the national nuclear technology infrastructure. NE serves the present and future energy needs of the Nation by managing the safe operation and maintenance of the DOE critical nuclear \ninfrastructure that provides nuclear technology goods and services. \nNE has one program completely funded within the Other Defense Activities appropriation - Idaho \nSitewide Safeguards and Security. In FY 2005 and FY 2006, NE has two programs that are partially funded within the Other Defense Activities appropriation - Idaho Facilities Management and Program Direction. Beginning in FY 2007 funds for these programs are solely requested in the Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation.\nThis Overview will describe Strategic Context, Mission, Benefits, Strategic Goals and Funding by \nGeneral Goal. These items together put the appropriation in perspective. The Annual Performance Results and Targets, Means and Strategies, and Validation and Verification sections address how the goals will be achieved and how performance will be measured. \nStrategic Context \nFollowing publication of the Administration’s “National Energy Policy”, the Department developed a \nStrategic Plan that defines its mission, four strategic goals for accomplishing that mission, and seven general goals to support the strategic goals. Each appropriation has developed quantifiable goals to support the general goals. Thus, the “goal cascade” is the following: \nDepartment Mission o Strategic Goal (25 yrs) o General Goal (10-15 yrs) o Program Goal (GPRA \nUnit) (10-15 yrs) \nTo provide a concrete link between budget, performance, and reporting, the Department developed a \n“GPRA\na unit” concept. Within DOE, a GPRA unit defines a major activity or group of activities that \nsupport the core mission and aligns resources with specific goals. Each GPRA unit has completed or \nwill complete a Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). A unique program goal was developed for \neach GPRA unit. A numbering scheme has been established for tracking performance and reporting.b\nThe goal cascade accomplishes two things. First, it ties major activities for each program to successive \ngoals and, ultimately, to DOE’s mission. This helps ensure the Department focuses its resources on fulfilling its mission. Second, the cascade allows DOE to track progress against quantifiable goals and \nto tie resources to each goal at any level in the cascade. Thus, the cascade facilitates the integration of \nbudget and performance information in support of the GPRA and the President’s Management Agenda \n(PMA).\na Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 \nb The numbering scheme uses the following numbering convention: Fi rst two digits identify the Gen eral Goal (01 through \n07); second two digits identify the GPRA Un it; last four digits are reserved for future use. \nPage 122 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nOverview FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Mission\nOne of the missions of the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology is to safeguard DOE \nnuclear infrastructure that provides nuclear technology goods and services. NE manages research laboratories and radiological facilities and is the Lead Program Secretarial Officer for the Idaho National \nLaboratory.\nBenefits\nNE plans to safeguard the national nuclear infrastruc ture currently in place to help meet the Nation’s \nenergy, environmental, health care, and national security needs. The Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and \nSecurity program provides protection of nuclear materials, classified matter, Government property, and other vital assets from unauthorized access, theft, diversion, sabotage, espionage, and other hostile acts that may cause risks to national security, the health and safety of DOE and contractor employees, the public or the environment. \nStrategic, General, and Program Goals \nThe Department’s Strategic Plan identifies four strategic goals (one each for defense, energy, science, \nand environmental aspects of the mission) plus seven general goals that tie to the strategic goals. The Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology supports the following goals: \nEnergy Strategic Goal: To protect our national and economic security by promoting a diverse supply of \nreliable, affordable, and environmentally sound energy. \nGeneral Goal 4, Energy Security: Improve energy security by developing technologies that foster a \ndiverse supply of reliable, affordable and environmentally sound energy by providing for reliable delivery of energy, guarding against energy emergencies, exploring advanced technologies that make a fundamental improvement in our mix of energy options, and improving energy efficiency. \nThe programs funded by the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology within Other Defense \nActivities appropriation have the following Program Goal which contribute to General Goal 4 in the “goal cascade”: \nProgram Goal 04.17.00.00: Maintain, enhance, and safeguard the Nation’s nuclear infrastructure \ncapability - to meet the Nation’s energy, environmental, medical research, space exploration, and national security needs. \nContribution to General Goal 4 \nThe Department has the responsibility to maintain and enhance the Nation’s nuclear infrastructure currently in \nplace. The Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security program supports activities that are required to protect the Department’s Idaho complex assets from theft, diversion, sabotage, espionage, unauthorized access, \ncompromise, and other hostile acts which may cause unacceptable adverse impacts on national security, program continuity, the health and safety of employees, the public, or the environment. \nPage 123 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nOverview FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Major FY 2005 Achievements \nThe Office of Nuclear Energy Idaho Design Basis Threat (DBT) Program Management Plan was issued \nin FY 2005. This plan utilizes the project management aspects of DOE Order 413.1, Program and Project Management Policy, to achieve implementation of the 2003 DBT by the end of FY 2006. A new DBT was issued in October 2004, which requires full implementation by the end of FY 2008. All FY 2005 actions required by the 2003 DBT project management plan that remain consistent with the 2004 \nDBT were accomplished. A DBT Implementation Plan that addresses both the 2003 and the 2004 DBT \nwas prepared and the final design of the video capture upgrade project, in support of the DBT, at the Materials and Fuels Complex has been completed. \nFunding by General and Program Goal \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 \nGeneral Goal 4, En ergy Security \nProgram Goal 04.17.00.00, Maintain, enhance, and safeguard the \nnational nuclear infrastructure.............................................................. 78,381 91,872 75,949 \n Subtotal, General Goal 4 (Other Defense Activities) ......................... 78,381 91,872 75,949 \n All Other \n Pr ogram Direction ........................................................................... 33,587 30,792 0a\n Spent Nuclear Fuel Management..................................................... 1,488 0 0 \n Less Security Charge for Reimbursable Work................................. -3,003 -3,003 -3,003 \nTotal, All Other ....................................................................................... 32,072 27,789 -3,003 \nTotal, General Goal 4, (Other Defense Activities) .................................. 110,453 119,661 72,946 \na Beginning in FY 2007, funding for Program Direction is re quested under Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation. \nPage 124 Other Defense Activities/ \nNuclear Energy/Funding by Site FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology \nFunding by Site by Program \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 \nChicago Operations Office \nSpent Nuclear Fuel Management .............................. 1,488 0 0 \n \nIdaho National Laboratory \nIdaho Facilities Management .................................... 20,719a 17,584b 0c\nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security................... 57,662 74,288 75,949 \nTotal, Idaho National Laboratory ........................................ 78,381 91,872 75,949 \n \nIdaho Operations Office \nProgram Direction..................................................... 33,587 30,792 0c\nTotal, Other Defense Activitiesd.......................................... 113,456 122,664 75,949 \nSite Description \nChicago Operations Office\nSpent Nuclear Fuel Management \nChicago Operations Office administers a contract with BWXT Service, Inc. for continuing spent nuclear \nfuel and other related material storage at the BWXT Lynchburg Technology Center. \nIdaho National Laboratory \nIntroduction \nThe Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is an extensive research and engineering complex that has been \nthe center of nuclear energy research since 1949. It occupies 890 square miles in southeastern Idaho along the western edge of the Snake River Plain, 42 miles northwest of Idaho Falls, Idaho. There are \nnine primary facilities at the INL as well as administrative, engineering, and research laboratories in \nIdaho Falls, Idaho. The Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology (NE) is the Lead Program Secretarial Office (LPSO) responsible for the Idaho Operations Office (ID). Beginning in the second quarter of FY 2005, ANL-West became part of INL. \na Excludes $91,434,000 approp riated under Energy Supply and Conservation appropr iation, a $167,00 0 rescission, and \n$10,000,000 from Naval Reactors. \nb Excludes $81,774,000 appropriated und er Energy Supply and Conservation approp riation and $13,365,000 from Naval \nReactors.\nc Beginning in FY 2007, all fundi ng for Idaho Facilities Management and Program Direction are requested under Energy \nSupply and Conservation appropriation. \nd Funding totals exclude reduction for security charge for reimbursable work of $3,003,000. \nPage 125 Other Defense Activities/ \nNuclear Energy/Funding by Site FY 2007 Co ngressional Budget Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security\nThe Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security program provides protection of nuclear materials, classified \nmatter, government property, and other vital assets from unauthorized access, theft, diversion, sabotage, \nespionage, and other hostile acts that may cause risks to national security, the health and safety of DOE and contractor employees, the public or the environment. Program activities include security systems, material control and accountability, information and cyber security, and personnel security. In addition, a protective force is maintained. These activities ensure that the site, personnel, and assets remain safe \nfrom potential threats. \nPage 126 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure FY 2007 Congressional Budget Infrastructure\nFunding Profile by Subprogram \n(dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 \nCurrent \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nOriginal \nAppropriation FY 2006 \nAdjustments FY 2006 \nCurrent \nAppropriation FY 2007 \nRequest \nInfrastructure \nIdaho Facilities Management ......................... 20,719\na 17,762b -178c 17,584 0d\nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards \nand Security ......................... 57,662 75,008 -720e 74,288 75,949 \nTotal, Infrastructure................... 78,381 92,770 -898 91,872 75,949 \nMission\nThe mission of the Infrastructure program within the Other Defense Activities appropriation is to \nsafeguard the national nuclear infrastruc ture against hostile acts that may cause unacceptable adverse \nimpacts on national security; program continuity; or the health and safety of employees, the public, or \nthe environment. The mission also includes consolidating nuclear operations required to produce radioisotope power systems at a single, secure site, thereby enhancing the safety and security of these nuclear materials. \nIn FY 2005 and FY 2006, the Idaho Facilities Management program was funded in both the Energy \nSupply and Conservation and the Other Defense Activities appropriations. Beginning in FY 2007, the Idaho Facilities Management program is requested only under the Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation. Therefore, the FY 2007 funding tables, performance measures, and budget justification address only the Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security program \nBenefits\nThe Infrastructure program supports the Department’s Defense Strategic Goal to protect our national \nsecurity by protecting nuclear materials, classified matter, Government property, and other vital assets from unauthorized access, theft, diversion, sabotage, espionage, and other hostile acts that may cause risks to national security, the health and safety of DOE and contractor employees, the public or the environment. \na Excludes $91,434,000 appropriated und er Energy Supply and Conser vation appropriation, a $167,000 rescission and \n$10,000,000 from Naval Reactors. \nb Excludes $82,600,000 originally appropriated under Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation; $13,500,000 from \nNaval Reactors. \nc Includes a rescission of $177,62 0 in accordance with P.L. 10 9-148, Emergency Supplemen tal Appropriations to Address \nHurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006. \nd Beginning in FY 2007, all funding fo r Idaho Facilities Management is requested under Energy Su pply and Conservation \nappropriation. \ne Includes a rescission of $720,05 0 in accordance with P.L. 10 9-148, Emergency Supplemen tal Appropriations to Address \nHurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006. \nPage 127 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure FY 2007 Congressional Budget Strategic and Program Goals \nThe Department’s Strategic Plan identifies four strategic goals (one each for defense, energy, science, \nand environmental aspects of the mission) plus seven general goals that tie to the strategic goals. The \nInfrastructure program supports the following goal: \nEnergy Strategic Goal \nGeneral Goal 4, Energy Security: Improve energy security by developing technologies that foster a \ndiverse supply of reliable, affordable and environmentally sound energy by providing for reliable delivery of energy, guarding against energy emergencies, exploring advanced technologies that make a fundamental improvement in our mix of energy options, and improving energy efficiency. \nThe Infrastructure program has one program goal that contributes to General Goal 4 in the “goal \ncascade”:\nProgram Goal 04.17.00.00: Maintain, enhance, and safeguard the Nation’s nuclear infrastructure \ncapability - to meet the Nation’s energy, environmental, medical research, space exploration, and national security needs. \nContribution to Program Goal 04.17.00.00 (Maintain, enhance, and safeguard the Nation’s \nnuclear infrastructure capability) \nThe Department has the responsibility to maintain and enhance the Nation’s nuclear infrastructure \ncurrently in place. The Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security program supports activities that are required to protect the Department’s Idaho complex assets from theft, diversion, sabotage, espionage, unauthorized access, compromise, and other hostile acts which may cause unacceptable adverse impacts on national security, program continuity, the health and safety of employees, the public, or the \nenvironment. \nPage 128 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure FY 2007 Congressional Budget Funding by General and Program Goal \n (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 \nGeneral Goal 4, Energy Security \nProgram Goal 04.17.00.00: Maintain, enhance, and safeguard the Nation’s nuclear infrastructure capability \nIdaho Facilities Management............................................................ 20,719a 17,584b 0c\nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security .......................................... 57,662 74,288 75,949 \nTotal, General Goal 4 (Infrastructure) ................................................... 78,381 91,872 75,949 \na Excludes $91,434,000 appropriated und er Energy Supply and Conser vation appropriation, a $167,000 rescission and \n$10,000,000 from Naval Reactors. \nb Excludes $81,774,000 appropriated under Energy Supply and Conservation and $13,365,000 from Naval Reactors. \nc Beginning in FY 2007, all funding fo r Idaho Facilities Management is requested under Energy Su pply and Conservation \nappropriation. \nPage 129 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/Infrastructure FY 2007 Congressional Budget Annual Performance Results and Targets \nFY 2002 Results FY 2003 Results FY 2004 Results FY 2005 Results FY 2006 Targets FY 2007 Targets\nProgram Goal 04.17.00.00 (Maintain, enhance, and safeguard the Nation’s nuclear infrastructure capability)) \nInfrastructure\nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security \nDuring FY 2002, no national \nsecurity incidents occurred within NE Idaho sitewide cyber \nsystems and security areas that \ncaused unacceptable risk or damage to the Department. \n(MET TARGET) Completed the Idaho Integrated \nSafeguards and Security Plan to assure appropriate protective \nmeasures are taken \ncommensurate with the risks and consequences for both the \nlaboratories on the Idaho site. \n(MET TARGET) Issued the Design Basis Threat Implementation Plan for the Idaho National Engineering and \nEnvironmental Laboratory and \nArgonne National Laboratory-West. (MET TARGET) Completed FY 2005 actions at the Idaho Site required to implement the May 2003 \nDesign Basis Threat (DBT) as \ndefined in the Program Management Plan that remain \nconsistent with the \nrequirements of the October 2004 DBT. (MET TARGET) Install all physical protective system upgrades for the May 2003 Design Basis Threat \n(DBT) as outlined in the \napproved DBT Program Management Plan that remain \nconsistent with the requirements \nof the 2005 DBT. TBD\nPage 130 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure FY 2007 Congressional Budget Means and Strategies \nNE will use various means and strategies to achieve its program goals. However, various external \nfactors may impact the ability to achieve these goals. NE also performs collaborative activities to help \nmeet its goals. \nThe Department will implement the following means: \nƒContinue planning activities to implement the 2005 Design Basis Threat (DBT) Policy to ensure \nappropriate protective measures are taken commensurate with risk and consequence. \nThe Department will implement the following strategies: \nƒ\u0003Provide physical protection and maintain operational security systems. Implement personnel \nidentity verification and diskless workstation systems and conduct semi-annual and annual program reviews.\nThe following external factors could affect NE’s ability to achieve its strategic goal: \nƒIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security Key External Factors: Annual review of the Design Basis \nThreat (DBT) policy, which is based on current inte lligence information and threat assessment, \ncould result in significant changes in DBT requirements. This could affect NE’s ability to achieve goals on schedule. In addition, significant change in National Security Condition (SECON) level in response to a national security event would require re-prioritization of resources that could impact DBT implementation schedule. Finally, acquisition and testing of developmental high technology security systems have the potential to reduce the number of protective forces personnel, however, these systems have not been tested in a DOE laboratory environment. \nValidation and Verification \nTo validate and verify program performance, NE will conduct various internal and external reviews and \naudits. NE’s programmatic activities are subject to continuing review by the Congress, the General \nAccountability Office, the Department’s Inspector General, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the \nU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, state environmental and health agencies, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and the Department’s Office of Engineering and Construction Management (including DOE Real Property Management Order). In addition, NE provides continual management and oversight of its vital field infrastructure programs. Periodic internal and external program reviews evaluate progress against established plans. These reviews provide an opportunity to verify and validate performance. Monthly, quarterly, semi-annual and annual reviews, consistent with program management plans, are held to ensure technical progress, cost and schedule adherence, and responsiveness to program requirements. \nNERAC subcommittees evaluate progress of NE’s research and development programs. NERAC \nsimilarly reviews specific program plans as they are being formulated. In early FY 2004, NERAC established a Subcommittee on Evaluations. The full NERAC and its subcommittees have provided independent evaluations in the past, but these evaluations never comprehensively covered the entire nuclear energy program. The new Subcommittee engages appropriate experts to monitor, on a continual basis designated NE programs and evaluate the progress of these programs against (a) direction and guidance provided by the full NERAC and (b) program plans and performance measures developed by \nPage 131 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure FY 2007 Congressional Budget the program under evaluation. This Subcommittee provides arm’s length, independent assessments that \nare critical to the evaluation of NE programs. \nPage 132 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/Idaho Facilities Management FY 2007 Congressional Budget Idaho Facilities Management \nFunding Schedule by Activity \n(dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nIdaho Facilities Management \nINL Operations and Infrastructure ............................. 20,719 17,584 0 \nTotal, Idaho Facilitie s Management ................................... 20,719a 17,584b 0c\nDescription\nThe Idaho National laboratory (INL) is a multi-program national laboratory that pursues a wide range of \nnuclear power research and development and other national energy security activities. The purpose of \nthe Idaho Facilities Management (IFM) Program is to ensure that the infrastructure required to support \nthese efforts is maintained and operated to meet programmatic requirements and in compliance environment, safety and health rules and regulations. \nThe IFM Program manages and operates the three main engineering and research campuses at the INL: \n(1) the Reactor Technology Center (RTC) at the site, a 890 square mile reservation west of Idaho Falls, (2) the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) at the site, and (3) the Science and Technology Complex (STC) in Idaho Falls. As INL landlord, the IFM Program also manages and operates the Central Facilities Area (CFA) at the site and various sitewide infrastructure systems and facilities, such as electrical utility distribution. \nThe STC, CFA and sitewide infrastructure systems and facilities come under Sitewide Infrastructure \nwithin the IFM Program. The funding above is for Sitewide Infrastructure only. In FY 2005 and FY \n2006, the Sitewide Infrastructure part of the IFM program was funded in the Other Defense Activities \nappropriations. Beginning in FY 2007, all of the Idaho Facilities Management Program is requested under the Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation.\nBenefits\nThe IFM program supports “National Energy Policy” goals by maintaining and operating INL basic \ninfrastructure that is required to support facilities dedicated to advanced nuclear energy technology research and many other Federal government activities. Additional activities include managing special nuclear materials contained in these f acilities and the disposition of DOE legacy waste materials under \nNE ownership. \na Excludes $91,434,000 ap propriated under Energy Supply app ropriation, a $167,000 rescission and $10,000,000 from Naval \nReactors.\nb Excludes $81,774,000 appropr iated under Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation and $13,365,000 from Naval \nReactors.\nc Beginning in FY 2007, fundin g for Idaho Facilities Managemen t is requested under Energy Supply and Conservation \nappropriation. \nPage 133 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/Idaho Facilities Management FY 2007 Congressional Budget NE has developed an INL Ten Year Site Plan (TYSP) that establishes the annual budget requirements for the IFM Program, provides a mission needs analysis of facilities and infrastructure, and identifies the maintenance and recapitalization investments needed at the site to support projected missions such as the \nAdvanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, the Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative, a range of \nnational security technology programs, and the Idaho Cleanup Project (ICP) under the Office of Environmental Management. The plan meets the requirements of DOE Order 430.1B, Real Property \nAsset Management (RPAM) .\nDetailed Justification \n(dollars in thousands)\nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nINL Operations and Infrastructure ................................. 20,719 17,584 0 \nƒBase Operations ............................................................. 12,030 12,599 0 \nSitewide Infrastructure Base Operations maintains the STC, the CFA, and the INL common-use \nfacilities, utilities, equipment, and land. The CFA consists of 72 buildings and 60 major support \nstructures. The STC includes 30 DOE owned and leased buildings consisting of office space and extensive laboratory facilities. The Sitewide Infrastructure outside NE campuses and the ICP \nwork complexes consists of 34 buildings and 35 major utility systems and structures. \nƒRoutine Maintenance and Repair ................................ 876 674 0 \nThe goal of this program is to fund routine maintenance and repair within the target industry range of 2% to 4% of Replacement Plant Value (RPV). The use of this industry benchmark was recommended by the National Research Council’s Congressionally-sponsored 1998 study, Stewardship of Federal Facilities .\nƒGeneral Plant Projects (GPP) ...................................... 5,412 1,244 0 \nIn FY 2005 and FY 2006, GPPs for Sitewide Infrastructure support recapitalization of the INL in accordance with DOE Order 430.1B, Real Property Asset Management and the INL TYSP.\nƒCapital Equipment (CE) .............................................. 2,401 3,067 0 \nIn FY 2005 and FY 2006, equipment purchases for Sitewide Infrastructure include such things as \nshop and miscellaneous maintenance equipment, vehicles and heavy equipment, and laboratory equipment. This funding primarily provides replacements for aged, deteriorated equipment and procurement of new equipment to meet emerging requirements. \nTotal, Idaho Facilities Management .................................. 20,719\na 17,584b 0c\na Excludes $91,434,000 ap propriated under Energy Supply app ropriation, a $167,000 rescission and $10,000,000 from Naval \nReactors.\nb Excludes $81,774,000 appropr iated under Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation and $13,365,000 from Naval \nReactors.\nc Beginning in FY 2007, fundin g for Idaho Facilities Managemen t is requested under Energy Supply and Conservation \nappropriation. \nPage 134 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/Idaho Facilities Management FY 2007 Congressional Budget Explanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nINL Operations and Infrastructure \nƒBase Operations\nThe decrease of $12,599,000 reflects the request for Sitewide base operations \nactivities being requested in the Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation \nbeginning in FY 2007 ...................................................................................................... -12,5 99\nƒRoutine Maintenance and Repair \nThe decrease of $674,000 reflects the request for Sitewide routine maintenance and repair activities being requested in the Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation beginning in FY 2007 ...................................................................................................... -674 \nƒGeneral Plant Projects (GPP)\nThe decrease of $1,244,000 reflects the request for Sitewide GPP activities being requested in the Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation beginning in FY 2007 ........................................................................................................................... ...... -1,244 \nƒCapital Equipment\nThe decrease of $3,067,000 reflects the request for Sitewide capital equipment \nactivities being requested in the Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation beginning in FY 2007 ...................................................................................................... -3,067\nTotal, INL Operations ......................................................................................................... -17,584\nTotal Funding Change, Idaho Facilities Management ..................................................... -17,584\nPage 135 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/Idaho Facilities Management FY 2007 Congressional Budget Capital Operating Expenses and Construction Summary \nCapital Operating Expenses \n(dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nCapital Equipment ................................................................. 2,401 3,067 0 \nGeneral Plant Projects............................................................ 5,412 1,244 0 \nTotal, Capital Operating Expenses ........................................ 7,813 4,311 0a\na Beginning in FY 2007, fu nding for Idaho Facilities Management will be requested only under the Energ y Supply and \nConservation appropriation. \nPage 136 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/ \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security \nFunding Schedule by Activity\n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security \n Idaho Operations Office a..................................................... 57,662 74,288 75,949 \n Less Security Charge for Reimbursable Work .................... -3,003 -3,003 -3,003 \nTotal, Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security ..................... 54,659 71,285 72,946 \nFunding Schedule by Category \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 \n Idaho Operations Office \n Protective Forces ....................................................................... 33,937 42,665 42,500 \n Security Systems ....................................................................... 8,448 15,961 12,092 \n Transportation .......................................................................... 81 0 0 \n Information Security.................................................................. 2,290 2,157 2,226 \n Personnel Secu rity..................................................................... 1,833 1,919 2,398 \n Material Control & Accountability............................................ 3,592 4,053 4,901 \n Program Management ............................................................... 2,369 2,138 2,232 \n Cyber Security........................................................................... 5,112 5,395 9,600 \nTotal, Idaho Operations Office ......................................................... 57,662 74,288 75,949 \nDescription \nThe mission of the Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security (S&S) program is to protect DOE interests \nfrom theft, diversion, sabotage, espionage, unauthorized access, compromise, and other hostile acts that \nmay cause unacceptable adverse impacts on national security; program continuity; or the health and safety of employees, the public, or the environment. \na Program levels reflect Work for Others (W FO) before the bottom line reductio n to the NE appropriation for a “Security \nCharge for Reimbursable Work.” This of fset is displayed above by fiscal year. The new budget authority, as well as the \noffsetting collections (such as when ot her agencies are using the facility), for the WFO portion of the S&S budget is included \nin Departmental Administration’s Cost of Work for Others program, which is ma naged by the Department’s Office of Chief \nFinancial Officer. \nPage 137 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/ \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget Benefits\nThis program is designed to support DOE’s Defense Strategic Goal to protect our national security. The \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security program provides protection of nuclear materials, classified matter, Government property, and other vital assets from unauthorized access, theft, diversion, sabotage, espionage, and other hostile acts that may cause risks to national security, the health and safety of DOE and contractor employees, the public or the environment. \nDOE will fully implement the 2003 Design Basis Threat (DBT) in FY 2006 by completing physical \nupgrades and reducing Category I facilities at INL to two co-located Category I facilities protected by a single Perimeter Intrusion Detection and Assessment System (PIDAS). Implementation is in accordance with the approved resource-loaded Idaho Site DBT Implementation Plan. \nDOE will continue planning activities toward implementation of the 2005 DBT policy requirements \nusing a risk-informed approach to physical upgrades. Both the 2004 and 2005 DBT policy requirements increased the strength of the postulated adversarial threat over the 2003 DBT; although detailed vulnerability assessments have not yet been completed, significant security system physical upgrades are expected. DOE’s Office of Independent Oversight and Performance Assurance conducted a site assistance visit at Idaho to identify opportunities to increase security in a more cost effective manner through better integration of highly advanced security technology with site security operations. Pending the completion of vulnerability assessments, which will guide protection strategy, DOE believes that early investment in improved positions for defending forces, more capable detection systems, and technological deterrent devices at target locations will result in cost avoidance over the lifetime by relying more on technology and tactics than additional protective force members to counter the revised threat.\nDOE will also implement Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 201, entitled Personal\nIdentity Verification of Federal Employees and Contractors. FIPS 201 was developed to satisfy the \nrequirements of Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-12. The new standard requires \nimproving identity and authentication of Federal employees and contractors accessing Federal facilities and information systems. \nDOE would like to begin the transition to a diskless classified computing environment in FY 2007. This \ninitiative would be funded by user programs. \nDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nIdaho Operations Office ...................................................... 57,662 74,288 75,949 \nƒProtective Force ............................................................. 33,937 42,665 42,500 \nPhysical Protection Protective Forces provides for security guards or other specialized \npersonnel and equipment, training, and management needed to effectively carry out the \nprotection tasks during normal and security emergency conditions.\nPage 138 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/ \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nƒPhysical Security Systems ............................................. 8,448 15,961 12,092 \nPhysical Security Protection Systems provides for equipment to protect vital security interests \nand Government property per the local threat, including performance testing, intrusion detection and assessment, fences, barriers, secure storage, lighting, sensors, entry/access control devices, \nlocks, explosives detection, and vital components and tamper-safe monitoring. \nIn FY 2006, NE will initiate a Technology Deployment R&D activity with the Office of \nSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance to test new security technologies for eventual deployment in the DOE complex to meet the DBT policy requirements. \nIn FY 2007, NE will: \n- maintain operational physical security systems to include barriers, lighting, sensors, etc. \n- implement Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS 201) by installing card readers \nthat will incorporate the new technology for access compatibility with the new badging \ntechnology.\n- continue planning activities associated with implementation of the 2005 DBT initiated in \nFY 2006 at the Idaho site. Specific activities include design and initiate installation of \nsecurity protection systems to include barriers, lighting, and sensors.\nƒTransportation ............................................................... 81 0 0 \nTransportation provides for all security-related transportation for intra-site transfers of special \nnuclear materials (including safe havens), weapons, and other classified material that is not funded through the National Nuclear Security Administration’s Office of Transportation Safeguards (OTS). The safeguards and security program pays for cost of protection and secure movement. Transportation activities are included in Material Control and Accountability (MC&A) beginning in FY 2006.\nƒInformation Security ..................................................... 2,290 2,157 2,226 \nInformation Security ensures that classified and sensitive unclassified matter is adequately protected, including export controls, classified matter protection and control, technical \nsurveillance countermeasures, and operations security.\nƒPersonnel Security ......................................................... 1,833 1,919 2,398 \nPersonnel Security includes clearance program, adjudication, security awareness and education, \nvisit control, Personnel Security Assurance Program, psychological/medical assessments, and administrative review costs. Security Investigations (SI) activities performed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)-associated access authorizations are funded by the Office of Security and are not requested/displayed in NE’s budget. \nIn FY 2007, NE will: \n- maintain the Human Reliability Program \nPage 139 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/ \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n- implement the Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS 201), by replacing \npersonnel security badges to implement the smart card technology.\nƒMaterial Control and Accountability ........................... 3,592 4,053 4,901 \nMaterial Control and Accountability (MC&A) provides for the protection of special nuclear \nmaterials (SNM), nuclear weapons, test devices, and weapons components and parts by \ndetermining and documenting the amounts of nuclear materials in packaged items. The cost of activities such as MC&A training, proper measurement of materials, and performing a physical inventory are included in the budgets of those programs responsible for processing or storing SNM and nuclear weapons components and parts, and are not included here.\nƒProgram Management ................................................... 2,369 2,138 2,232 \nProgram Management includes policy oversight and development and updating of security plans, assessments, and approvals to determine if assets are at risk. Also included are contractor management and administration, planning, and integration of security activities into facility operations.\nƒCyber Security ............................................................... 5,112 5,395 9,600 \nCyber Security ensures that sensitive and classified information that is electronically processed, \ntransmitted, or stored is properly identified and protected. The Cyber Security activity ensures \nthat electronic systems are appropriately marked and protected; automated information and protection systems are tested; Communications Security (COMSEC) and Telecommunications Electronics Material Protected from Emanating Spurious Transmissions (TEMPEST) measures are in place; and an appropriate level of infrastructure reliability and integrity is maintained. \nIn FY 2007, NE will: \n- implement the Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS 201). Specific activities \ninclude card readers and biometric readers to be attached to each unclassified computer \nsystem and special hardware for around 2,000 registered remote access users. \n- NE will also implement hardware and software for a new system to implement \nCertification Authority Capability. \nTotal, Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security ................ 57,662 74,288 75,949 \nPage 140 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/ \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget Explanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security \nƒProtective Forces \nThe decrease of $165,000 reflects reduced additional protective force personnel \nand armor to support the implementation of the 2005 DBT...................................... -165\nƒPhysical Security Systems\nThe decrease of $3,869,000 reflects reduced implementation of 2005 DBT such \nas: installing advanced physical security systems, such as Remote Operated Weapons Systems (ROWS); and completing design and initiating installation of security protection systems to include barriers, lighting, and sensor at the MFC ..... -3,869 \nƒInformation Security\nThe increase of $69,000 is due to increased declassification/classification and information protection activities................................................................................ +69\nƒPersonnel Security\nThe increase of $479,000 will initiate implementation of the Federal\nInformation Processing Standard (FIPS 201) by replacing personnel security \nbadges to implement the smart card technology ........................................................ +479\nƒMaterial Control & Accountability\nThe increase of $848,000 reflects purchase of new system upgrades including \nreplacement of equipment that have exceeded their design life ................................ +848\nƒProgram Management\nThe increase of $94,000 support additional professional training and development............................................................................................................... +94\nƒCyber Security\nThe increase of $4,205,000 supports implementation for the Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS 201) such as h ardware including card readers and \nbiometric readers to be attached to each unclassified computer system and special hardware for around 2,000 registered remote access users. Additionally, hardware, software, and personnel are necessary to maintain and administer a Certification Authority Capability ............................................................................. +4,205\nTotal Funding Change, Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security ............................. +1,661\nPage 141 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nInfrastructure/ \nIdaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security FY 2007 Congressional Budget Capital Operating Expenses \n(dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \n \nGeneral Plant Project............................................................................... 0 0 1,200 \nCapital Equipment ................................................................................... 389 446 1,717 \nTotal, Capital Operating Expenses ........................................................... 389 446 2,917 \nPage 142 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Program Direction \nFunding Profile by Category \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nIdaho Operations Office \nSalaries and Benefits................................................................ 24,437 23,792 0 \nTravel....................................................................................... 1,000 975 0 \nSupport Services ...................................................................... 870 847 0 \nOther Related Expenses ........................................................... 7,280 5,178 0 \nTotal, Idaho Operations O ffice ...................................................... 33,587 30,792 0a\nFull Time Equivale nts.................................................................... 203 197 0a\nTotal Program Direction \nSalaries and Benefits................................................................ 24,437 23,792 0 \nTravel....................................................................................... 1,000 975 0 \nSupport Services ...................................................................... 870 847 0 \nOther Related Expenses ........................................................... 7,280 5,178 0 \nTotal, Program Direction .............................................................. 33,587 30,792 0 a\nTotal, Full Time Equivalents ......................................................... 203b 197 0 a\nMission\nProgram Direction provides the Federal staffing resources and associated costs required to provide \noverall direction and execution of the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology (NE). NE promotes secure, competitive, and environmentally responsible nuclear technologies to serve the present \nand future energy needs of the country. NE carries out this mission in several ways. As the central \norganization with the Federal Government’s core expertise in nuclear technology, NE directs the Nation’s investment in nuclear science and technology by sponsoring research at the national \nlaboratories, U.S. universities, and private industry. Through its support of innovative, higher risk \nscience and by helping to preserve the national research and development infrastructure, NE works to advance the responsible use of nuclear technology. NE also manages the safe operation and maintenance of critical nuclear infrastructure and provides nuclear technology goods and services to industry and government. \nNE is the Lead Program Secretarial Officer (LPSO) of the Idaho site. NE Headquarters and the Idaho \nOperations Office reorganized in January 2005 to more effectively support the new nuclear energy missions and prepare for the oversight and management of the new contracts for the operation of the \nIdaho site. This new structure will carry out all programmatic, project, and landlord responsibilities assigned to NE now and in the future, both as LPSO and Contracting Officer for DOE’s operations in Idaho, and as responsible PSO for programs, projects, facilities, and operations at other DOE sites. In \na Beginning in FY 2007, funding for Idaho Operations O ffice is requested under En ergy Supply and Conservation. \nb This number represents actual FY 2005 FTE usage. \nPage 143 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget FY 2005 and FY 2006, the program direction account for the Idaho Operations Office was funded from \nthe Other Defense Activities appropriation. Beginning in FY 2007, funding for Idaho Operations Office is requested under Energy Supply and Conservation appropriation.\nAs stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission. The Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology performs critical functions which directly support the mission of the Department. These functions include: maintain, enhance, and safeguard the Nation’s nuclear infrastructure capability - to meet the Nation’s energy, environmental, medical research, space exploration, and national security needs. \nDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nSalaries and Benefits ............................................................... 24,437 23,792 0\nThe Federal Staff monitors and evaluates LPSO activities at Idaho Operations Office and the INL. The \nstaff includes scientific, engineering, and technical personnel as well as program support personnel in the areas of budget, finance, general administration, procurement, information resource management, policy \nreview and coordination, infrastructure management, construction management, labor relations, personnel \nand human resources management, and legal support. Idaho Operations Office currently has a staff of 203 associated with NE programs. \nTravel ....................................................................................... 1,000 975 0 \nTravel includes funding for transportation of Idaho personnel associated with NE programs, their per diem \nallowances while in authorized travel status, and other expenses incidental to travel. \nSupport Services ..................................................................... 870 847 0 \nSupport Services includes funding for technical and management support services provided to Idaho \nOperations Office employees associated with NE programs. \nOther Related Expenses ......................................................... 7,280 5,178 0 \nOther Related Expenses includes funding at Idaho for the acquisition of computer hardware and software, \ntelecommunications, mail services, office supplies, subscriptions, vehicle usage, printing, ergonomic furniture, rent and utilities.\nTotal, Program Direction ....................................................... 33,587 30,792 0\n a\na Beginning in FY 2007, funding for Idaho Operating Office is requested under Energy Supply and Conservation. \nPage 144 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Explanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nSalaries and Benefits \nƒThe decrease of $23,792,000 reflects the transfer of program direction activities from \nOther Defense Activities to Energy Supply and Conservation........................................... -23,792 \nTravel\nƒThe decrease of $975,000 reflects the transfer of program direction activities from \nOther Defense Activities to Energy Supply and Conservation........................................... -975 \nSupport Services\nƒThe decrease of $847,000 reflects the transfer of program direction activities from \nOther Defense Activities to Energy Supply and Conservation........................................... -847 \nOther Related Expenses \nƒThe decrease of $5,178,000 reflects the transfer of program direction activities from \nOther Defense Activities to Energy Supply and Conservation........................................... -5,178 \nTotal Funding Change, Program Direction .......................................................................... -30,792\nPage 145 Other Defense Activities/Nuclear Energy/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Support Services by Category \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nTechnical Support \n Surveys or Reviews of Technical Operations ......................... . 870 847 0 -847 -100% \nTotal, Technical Support ........................................................... . 870 847 0 -847 -100% \nTotal, Support Services.............................................................. . 870 847 0 -847 -100% \nOther Related Expenses by Category \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nOther Related Expenses \nWorking Capital Fund ......................................................... . 1,284 0 0 0 0% \nOperations and Maintenance of Equipment......................... . 600 605 0 -605 -100% \nPrinting and Reproduction ................................................... . 130 125 0 -125 -100% \nTraining ............................................................................... . 300 275 0 -275 -100% \nRent and Utilities ................................................................ . 900 900 0 -900 -100% \nCommunications ................................................................. . 2,045 1,902 0 -1,902 -100% \nSupplies and Materials ........................................................ . 65 65 0 -65 -100% \nOther Services...................................................................... . 1,956 1,306 0 -1,306 -100% \nTotal, Other Related Expenses .................................................. . 7,280 5,178 0 -5,178 -100% \nPage 146 Other Defense Activities/ \nDefense Related Administrative Support FY 2007 Congressional Budget Defense Related Administrative Support \nFunding Schedule by Activity \n(dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 \nDefense Related Administrative Support .............................………... 91,700 86,699 93,258 \nDescription \nFrom FY 1999 through 2006, funding has been provided within the Other Defense Activities \nappropriation to offset funding within the Departmental Administration appropriation. This offset \naddresses the significant amount of administrative support activities performed within the Departmental Administration appropriation that are of direct benefit to the Department’s defense related programs. \nPer direction provided in the FY 2004 Energy Water and Development conference report, the FY 2007 \nbudget request reflects a proportional contribution from Other Defense Activities for Departmental Administration costs. This budget offsets Departmental Administration administrative work that supports the following appropriations: Defense Environmental Cleanup, Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal, and Other Defense Activities. These functions do not duplicate services provided within the Office of the Administrator for the National Nuclear Security Administrative Program. \nBenefits\nThe services provided by the offices within Departmental Administration are performed without \ndistinction between defense and non-defense related activities and benefit all headquarters organizations proportionally. These activities include processing personnel actions, building maintenance and operation, payroll and general accounting services, budgeting and funds execution, procurement, project management, information management, legal services, life-cycle asset management, workforce diversity, minority economic impact, policy, international affairs, Congressional and intergovernmental liaison, public affairs, and management of the Working Capital Fund. \nDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY PY FY CY FY BY \n \nDefense Related Administrative Support ................................ .91,700 86,699 93.258 \nThe funding request offsets the following expenses within the Departmental Administration \nAppropriation Account: \nƒSalaries and benefits include wages, overtime pay, cash incentive awards, lump sum leave \npayments and other performance awards for about 300 FTEs in areas such as human resources, budget, financial accounting, logistics, national and international energy policy analysis, environmental policy, project management, information management, legal, contract management, property management, congressional and intergovernmental liaison and public and media outreach. \nPage 147 Other Defense Activities/ \nDefense Related Administrative Support FY 2007 Congressional Budget (dollars in thousands) \n FY PY FY CY FY BY \n \nƒOther Related Expenses includes funding for employee training and development and funding to \nsupport the Working Capital Fund for rental space, telecommunications, utilities and miscellaneous charges, printing and reproduction, other services, operating and maintenance of \nequipment, purchase of goods and services through government accounts, supplies and materials \nand equipment. \nƒSupport Services finances technical and management support services. The areas of support \ninclude information technology support, project control and performance, facilities and \ninfrastructure, strategic planning, independent financial auditing, automated data processing, project management evaluations, delivery of training, operation of the Headquarters technical and law libraries, database maintenance, financial system operations and minimal technical financial support.\nƒProgram Support funding includes a proportionate share of the I-MANAGE system to design and \nimplement a new, integrated and user-friendly financial management system for the Department. The system will help the Department fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities and meet both internal \nmanagement and external reporting requirements.\nƒProgram support also supports the Department’s cyber security program which provides consistent principles and requirements for Cyber Security that Departmental organizations can implement for the protection of classified and unclassified information, as required by National laws and policies.\nTotal, Defense Related Administrative Support.....................\n.91,700 86,699 93.258 \nExplanation of Funding Changes \nFY 2007 vs. \nFY 2006 \n($000)\nDefense Related Administrative Support \nThe FY 2004 Energy Water and Development Conference report directed the \nDepartment to submit budget requests beginning with fiscal year 2005 that reflected a proportional contribution from Other Defense Activities for Departmental \nAdministration costs. The FY 2007 funding represents 32.0% of the Departmental \nAdministration appropriation administrative costs……….…………………………….. +6,559\nTotal Funding Change, Defense Related Administrative Support……….………… +6,559\nPage 148 Other Defense Activities/ \nHearings and Appeals/ \nOverview 2007 Congressional Budget Other Defense Activities \nOffice of Hearings and Appeals \nOverview \nAppropriation Summary by Program \n (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 \nCurrent \nAppropriationFY 2006 \nOriginal \nAppropriationFY 2006 \nAdjustments FY 2006 \nCurrent \nAppropriationFY 2007 \nRequest \nOther Defense Activities \nHearings and Appeals ........................................ 4,283 4,353 -43a 4,310 4,422\nTotal, Other Defense Activities ............................... 4,283 4,353 -43a 4,310 4,422\nPreface\nThe Department of Energy operates and supervises a great number of programs to further its National \nDefense and the Environmental Strategic Goals. Many of these programs seek to balance the interests \nof different and sometimes competing stakeholders. The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) \nprovides legal adjudicatory services for the Department’s programs so that these conflicting interests may be decided in a fair, impartial and efficient manner. \nWithin the Other Defense Activities Appropriation, OHA operates with three principal legal staffs – the \nOffice of Legal Analysis, the Office of Financial Analysis and the Office of Economic Analysis. \nThis Overview will describe Strategic Context, Mission, and Benefits. These items together put this \nAppropriation in perspective. \nStrategic Context\nFollowing publication of the Administration’s National Energy Policy, the Department developed a \nStrategic Plan that defines the mission, four strategic goals for accomplishing that mission, and seven general goals to support the strategic goals. As stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished not only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission. OHA performs critical functions which directly support the mission of the Department. These functions include ensuring, through its role in conducting hearings in Personnel Security cases, that only trustworthy employees are allowed access to classified information or controlled nuclear materials. Likewise, in its supervision of Whistleblower hearings, OHA insures that the Department has a workplace where employee concerns about health and safety, fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement may be freely expressed to DOE or contractor management without fear of retaliation. OHA’s role in deciding Appeals and Applications for Exceptions supports the Department in ensuring that relevant regulations and statutes are applied properly and without undue disruption to the private sector. This directly benefits the public and reduces the Department’s litigation costs in Federal courts. \na Reflects a 1% rescission in accor dance with P.L. 109-148, Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006. \nPage 149 Other Defense Activities/ \nHearings and Appeals/ \nOverview 2007 Congressional Budget Mission\nOHA’s mission is to conduct fair and efficient hearings and to issue decisions of the Department with \nrespect to any adjudicative proceedings that the Secretary may delegate. OHA’s jurisdiction includes, \nfor example, security clearance hearings, hearings of complaints filed under the DOE Contractor Employee Protection Program as well as appeals requesting review of any determination reached by any official within the Department under OHA’s jurisdiction. \nAs stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission of the Department. OHA performs critical functions which directly support the mission. These functions include ensuring, through its role in conducting hearings in Personnel Security cases, that only trustworthy employees are allowed access to classified information or controlled nuclear materials. Likewise, in its supervision of Whistleblower \nhearings, OHA insures that the Department has a workplace where employee concerns about health and safety, fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement may be freely expressed to DOE or contractor \nmanagement without fear of retaliation. OHA’s role in deciding Appeals and Applications for Exceptions supports the Department in ensuring that relevant regulations and statutes are applied properly and without undue disruption to the private sector. This directly benefits the public and reduces the Department’s litigation costs in Federal courts. \nBenefits\nIn its adjudicatory mission for the Department, OHA offers a fair, impartial and customer-friendly \nprocess in which firms and individuals may seek review of agency actions. OHA is also charged with conducting hearings in Personnel Security cases. OHA issues timely, high quality decisions in cases involving DOE personnel security clearance adjudications that ensure only trustworthy personnel are allowed access to classified information and special nuclear materials. Thus, OHA directly supports the \nDepartment’s Defense Strategic Goal of helping ensure the security of the nuclear weapons stockpile.\nOHA also conducts investigations and hearings concerning whistleblower complaints filed by DOE \ncontractor employees and for issuing final agency decisions resolving them. In these cases, OHA strives to balance the public interest in promoting a workplace where concerns may be freely expressed without retaliation against the need of DOE contractors to manage their resources efficiently. This is especially \nimportant with regard to the Department’s Environmental Strategic Goal to ensure that cleanup of the environmental legacy of the Cold War is effectively performed. \nOHA also analyzes and decides appeals requesting review of any determination reached by any other \nofficial within the Department under the jurisdiction of the Secretary, including initial determinations under the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the payments-equal-to-taxes (PETT) provisions of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the special assessment provisions for the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund under the Energy Policy Act of 1992, and the reimbursement of costs of remedial actions at active uranium or thorium processing sites under the Energy Policy Act of 1992. OHA is responsible for deciding Applications for Exception from the generally applicable requirements of a rule, regulation or order of the Department. The Office also analyzes Petitions for Special Redress seeking \"extraordinary relief\" apart from or in addition to any other remedy provided in the Department's enabling statutes. By ensuring that the Department properly applies relevant regulations and statutes to affected parties, OHA directly benefits the public and saves the Department litigation expenses in federal courts. \nPage 150 Other Defense Activities/ \nHearings and Appeals/ \nOverview 2007 Congressional Budget Under proposed regulations, pursuant to the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for \nFY2003, OHA has been designated as the appeal authority for contractors who have been found to violate the contractor’s DOE-approved worker safety and health program. When implemented, OHA \nwill further contribute to the Department’s Environmental Strategic Goal. \nPage 151 Other Defense Activities/ \nHearings and Appeals/ \nOverview FY 2007 Congressional Budget Annual Performance Results and Targetsa\nFY 2002 Results FY 2003 Results FY 2004 Results FY 2005 Results FY2006 Targets FY 2007 Targets \n \nNo more than 20 percent of \nFreedom of Information Act \nAppeal cases will be decided \nafter the applicable deadline.No more than 19 percent of \nFreedom of Information Act \nAppeal cases will be decided after \nthe applicable deadline.\na Annual effectiveness and efficiency performance targets will not be repor ted in the Department’s annu al Performance and Accoun tability Report. \nPage 152 Other Defense Activities/ \nHearings and Appeals/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Program Direction \nFunding Profile by Category \n(dollars in thousands/whole FTEs) \n FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nHeadquarters\nSalaries and Benefits........................................................................ 3,193 3,236 3,310\nTravel............................................................................................... 90 90 90\nSupport Services .............................................................................. 100 100 233\nOther Related Expense..................................................................... 900 884 789\nTotal, Headquarters ................................................................................ 4,283 4,310 4,422\nFull Time Equivalents............................................................................ 23 23 25\nMission\nOHA’s mission is to conduct fair and efficient hearings and to issue decisions of the Department with \nrespect to any adjudicative proceedings that the Secretary may delegate. OHA’s jurisdiction includes, \nfor example, security clearance hearings, hearings of complaints filed under the DOE Contractor \nEmployee Protection Program as well as appeals requesting review of any determination reached by any official within the Department under OHA’s jurisdiction. \nAs stated in the Departmental Strategic Plan, DOE’s Strategic and General Goals will be accomplished \nnot only through the efforts of the major program offices in the Department but with additional effort from offices which support the programs in carrying out the mission of the Department. OHA performs critical functions which directly support the mission. These functions include ensuring, through its role in conducting hearings in Personnel Security cases, that only trustworthy employees are allowed access to classified information or controlled nuclear materials. Likewise, in its supervision of Whistleblower \nhearings, OHA insures that the Department has a workplace where employee concerns about health and safety, fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement may be freely expressed to DOE or contractor \nmanagement without fear of retaliation. OHA’s role in deciding Appeals and Applications for Exceptions supports the Department in ensuring that relevant regulations and statutes are applied properly and without undue disruption to the private sector. This directly benefits the public and reduces the Department’s litigation costs in Federal courts. \nDetailed Justification \n (dollars in thousands) \nFY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 \nSalaries and Benefits ……................................................ 3,193 3,236 3,310\nFunding supports 25 FTEs in FY 2007 including costs for pay raises and promotions. OHA staff \nprovides hearing officers and decisions in a wide variety of matters, such as security clearance and whistleblower cases. \nPage 153 Other Defense Activities/ \nHearings and Appeals/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Travel ….............................................................................. 90 90 90 \nFor transportation to DOE field sites to conduct hearings on security clearance and whistleblower cases.\nSupport Services ……......................................................... 100 100 233\nFunding for support of OHA’s computer information system and maintaining OHA’s internet presence, \nincluding rapid public access to all of the office’s published decisions. OHA utilizes computer information systems to improve management and promote efficient use of resources, and it promptly (within 24 hours) publishes OHA decisions and findings on its publicly accessible, customer-friendly and increasingly visited website. With OHA’s (HG) Information Management (IM) Infrastructure System, OHA funds contractor support including eXCITE to maintain its computer systems and other hardware. This System also supports expenses associated with Local Area Network lines and other associated IM costs charged through the Working Capital Fund. \nOther Related Expenses …................................................. 900 884 789\nThis category includes funding for employee training and charges by the Working Capital Fund for base \nservices: rent, utilities, telephone, supplies, postage, building operations, photocopies, STARS, telecommunications, printing (including publication of federal register notices, and printing of \ndecisions). OHA also pays for certain services directly, including timesharing (Westlaw) and purchases \nof computer equipment and software. \nTotal, Program Direction….………………...............……... 4,283 4,310 4,422 \nExplanation of Funding Changes\nFY BY vs.\nFY CY \n($000)\nSalaries and Benefits\nFY 2007 funding change increase includes pay raises, promotions for 25 FTEs. .............. +74\nTravel ............................................................................................................................... ... +0,000\nSupport Services\nFY 2007 funding change for increased expenses of eXCITE program, and other \nassociated costs charged through Working Capital Fund. .................................................. +133 \nOther Related Expenses \nDecrease in FY 2007 funding for reductions in costs associated with the Working \nCapital Fund for services such as rent, building operations, STARS and other associated costs.............................................................................................................. -95\nTotal Funding Change, Program Direction ................................................................. +112\nPage 154 Other Defense Activities/ \nHearings and Appeals/ \nProgram Direction FY 2007 Congressional Budget Support Services by Category \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nManagement Support \nAutomated Data Processing........................ 100 100 233 +133 +133.0%\nTotal, Support Services..................................... 100 100 233 +133 +133.0%\nOther Related Expenses by Category \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nOther Related Expenses \nWorking Capital Fund ................................ 880 864 769 -95 -11.0%\nPrinting and Reproduction .......................... 20 20 20 0 0.0%\nTotal, Other Related Expenses ......................... 900 883 789 -94 -11.0%\nPage 155 Page 156 Safeguards and \nSecurity Crosscut\nPage 157 Safeguards and \nSecurity Crosscut\nPage 158 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Safeguards and Security \nProgram Mission\nThe mission of the Safeguards and Security (S&S) program at each Department of Energy (DOE) site is to protect DOE interests from theft, diversion, sabotage, espionage, unauthorized access, compromise, and other hostile acts which may cause unacceptable adverse impacts on national security, program \ncontinuity, the health and safety of employees, the public or the environment. \nThis section of the budget provides summary budget estimates of the Department’s S&S programs. \nDetails of the individual S&S programs and their budgets are found in the following program budget justifications: \nxNational Nuclear Security Administration \nxEnvironmental Management \nxSecurity and Safety Performance Assurance \nxInformation Management \nxScience\nxNuclear Energy \nProgram Overview \nThe budget for the Department’s direct funded S&S programs is organized to ensure consistency in \nprogram and budget execution and ensure adequate management, direction, tracking and monitoring of security costs throughout the Department. Each S&S program budget provides high visibility for S&S \nissues and helps the Department prioritize functions for effective and efficient S&S program \nimplementation. Furthermore, the structure of the S&S budgets ensures consistency in budget execution \nacross diverse programs, principally the National Nuclear Security Administration, Environmental Management, Science, and Nuclear Energy. For these Field Security programs, the budget structure takes the form of the following seven program elements: \n1. Protective Forces: Provides for the protection of special nuclear materials, information, employees, \nand government property from theft, diversion, sabotage, and malicious destruction. \n2. Security Systems: Addresses access control and interior/exter ior intrusion detection systems. \n3. Information Security: Ensures that individuals protect classified matter and sensitive unclassified \nmatter, and establishes protection systems that require degrees of protection for each classification level. \n4. Cyber Security: Assures effective and efficient protection of computer and technical resources. \n5. Personnel Security: Supports activities associated with the access authorization program. \nPage 159 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget 6. Material Control and Accountability: Provides assurance that the nuclear materials used and/or \nstored at DOE facilities are properly controlled and accounted for at all times. \n7. Program Management: Assures a framework for efficient and effective security operations. \nChanges in the Composition of the Safeguards and Security Crosscut \nThe composition of the S&S crosscut is modified as security-related DOE organizations are changed to \nmore effectively address the security concerns that confront the Department. \nPage 160 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Funding by Site \n (dollars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nField Security \n Science……………………………………..……. 72,773 73,630 76,592 +2,962 +4.0% \n National Nuclear Security Administration……… 743,929 789,751 746,412 -43,339 -5.5% \n Environmental Management……………………. 262,942 284,357 295,840 +11,483 +4.0% \n Nuclear Energy……………………………..…… 57,662 74,288 75,949 +1,661 +2.2% \nSubtotal, Field Security…………..…………...…... 1,137,306 1,222,026 1,194,793 -27,233 -2.2% \n \nHeadquarters Security \nSecurity & Safety Performance Assurance (SSA) \n Nuclear Safeguards and Security…………..…… 193,794 185,009 18 2,548 -2,461 -1.3% \n Security Investigations……..…………………… 44,561 46,258 40,000 -6,258 -13.5% Program Direction……………..………...……… 82,235 72,757 75,949 +3,192 +4.4% \nSubtotal, SSA……………………………………... 320,590 304,024 298,497 -5,527 -1.8% \nInformation Management (C IO Cyber).…….….…. 24,733 24,575 38,182 +13,607 +55.4% \nPhysical Security (NNSA)……………..………….. 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0.0% \nSubtotal, Headquarters Security…………………... 353,323 336,599 344,679 +8,080 +2.4% \nSubtotal, Safeguards and Security……………...…. 1,490,629 1,558,625 1,539,472 -19,153 -1.2% \nSecurity charge against reimbursable work……….. -38,608 -40,608 -41,608 -1,000 +2.5% \nTotal, Safeguards and Security…………………..... 1,452,021 1,518,017 1,497,864 -20,153 -1.3% \nFunding Profile \n (doll ars in thousands) \n FY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \nField Security \n Protective Forces/Transportation………….……. 578,579 646,847 660, 902 +14,055 +2.2% \n Security Systems………………………...……… 127,620 127,893 141,170 +13,277 +10.4% \n Information Security……………………….…… 38,248 34,118 36,489 +2,371 +6.9% \n Cyber Security…………………………….……. 125,946 117,304 122,821 +5,517 +4.7% Personnel Security…………………..……..…… 41,281 42,861 45,123 +2,262 +5.3% \n Material Control and Accountability……..…….. 45,432 44,045 44,898 +853 +1.9% \n Program Management………….…………...…... 14 3,492 168,368 143, 390 -24,978 -14.8% \nConstruction (NNSA)………………….…………. 36,708 40,590 0 -40,590 -100.0% \nSubtotal, Field Security…………………………… 1,137,306 1,222,026 1,194,793 -27,233 -2.2% \n Charge for Reimbursable Work……………...…. -38,608 -40,608 -41, 608 -1,000 +2.5% \nSubtotal, Field Security….………………..……… 1,098,698 1,181,418 1,153,185 -28,233 -2.4% \n \nHeadquarters Security \nSecurity & Safety Performance Assurance (SSA) \n Nuclear Safeguards and Security……….………. 193,794 185,009 18 2,548 -2,461 -1.3% \n Security Investigations………………..………… 44,561 46,258 40,000 -6,258 -13.5% Program Direction…………………….………… 82,235 72,757 75,949 +3,192 +4.4% \nSubtotal, SSA……………………………………... 320,590 304,024 298,497 -5,527 -1.8% \nInformation Management (CIO Cyber)…..………. 24,733 24,575 38,182 +13,607 +55.4% \nPhysical Security(NNSA)……………….…….….. 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0.0% \n Subtotal, Headquarters…………………….…..…. 353,323 336,599 344,679 +8,080 +2.4% \nTotal Safeguards and Security……………………. 1,452,021 1,518,017 1,497,864 -20,153 -1.3% \nPage 161 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Protective Forces \nMission\nThe mission of Protective Forces is to protect the Department’s critical assets which include nuclear \nweapons in DOE custody, nuclear weapons components, special nuclear materials, classified information and DOE facilities against a spectrum of threats, including terrorist activity, sabotage, espionage, theft, diversion, loss or unauthorized use. To accomplish this mission: \nxProtective Force programs throughout the complex provide for salaries, wages and benefits for \npersonnel; proper management and supervision; and sufficient quantities of well maintained and logically deployed equipment and facilities to ensure effective performance of assigned functions \nand tasks under normal and emergency conditions. \nxProtective Forces programs perform critical functions including the conduct of access control and \nsecurity response operations; the physical protection of special nuclear material, classified matter and information, and government property; emergency response forces and tactical assistance during \nevents as well as an on-scene security commander; random patrols; coordination with local law \nenforcement and protective force elements aimed at providing effective response to emergency situations; random prohibited article inspections; security alarm monitoring and dispatch services; the collection and destruction of classified matter; and constant testing of the protective force to \nrespond to various event scenarios.\nxProtective Forces Programs maintain a Special Response Team capability to provide resolution of \nincidents that require effective and timely response with force options that exceed the capability of front line protective force personnel. This includes recapture and recovery operations involving the \nuse of special weapons, systems and tactics to effect recovery of special nuclear material under \nauthorized control.\nFunding Schedule \n(dollars in thousands) \nProtective Forces FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \n Science………………………………..……… 27,485 29,010 33,050 +4,040 +13.9% \n National Nuclear Security Administration…... . 370,980 420,373 42 8,528 +8,155 +1.9% \n Environmental Management………….…….... 146,096 154,799 156,824 +2,025 +1.3% Nuclear Energy………………………...……... 34,018 42,665 42,500 -165 -0.4% \nTotal, Protective Forces ………………………. 578,579 646,847 660,902 +14,055 +2.2% \nPage 162 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Security Systems \nMission\nThe mission of Security Systems is the physical protection of special nuclear material and vital \nequipment, sensitive information, Departmental property and unclassified facilities. Included are buildings, fences, barriers, lighting, sensors, surveillance devices, entry control devices, access control systems, explosive detection systems, power systems and other real property and hardware designed for, or affecting security. This hardware and equipment is operated and used to support the protection of \nDOE property and other interests of national security. \nSecurity Systems programs support DOE-wide efforts required to conduct performance assurance \ntesting. These programs also ensure that security alarm systems are operational and functioning in accordance with applicable DOE Orders. Security System programs are also responsible for two essential subprograms: (1) a barriers/secure storage/lock program to restrict, limit, delay or deny entry into a designated area; and (2), an entry control/access program that provides positive identification of \npersonnel requiring access to facilities and initial access to facilities in general, ensuring that persons entering/leaving facilities are authorized, and do not introduce prohibited articles into or remove Government property from Departmental facilities. \nEstimates are provided for all access control administrative activity involving production, accountability \nand destruction of access authorization badges and firearms credentials. Estimates are also provided for vital systems components and tamper-safe oversight is provided by monitoring and responding to alarms, determining access and securing all alarmed structures on site. In addition, this element provides for handling all radio communications for the protection of the facilities.\nFunding Schedule \n(dollars in thousands) \nSecurity Systems FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \n Science……………………………...……..…. 10,495 11,030 6,615 -4,415 -40.0% \n National Nuclear Security Administra tion….... 72,193 53,696 64,000 +10,304 +19.2% \n Environmental Management………………..... 36,484 47,206 58,463 +11,257 +23.8% \n Nuclear Energy………………..………...……. 8,44 8 15,961 12,092 -3,869 -24.2% \nTotal, Security Systems …………………….…. 127,620 127,893 141,170 +13,277 +10.4% \nPage 163 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Information Security \nMission\nThe mission of Information Security is to ensure that material and documents that may contain sensitive \nand classified information are accurately and consistently identified, properly reviewed for content, \nappropriately marked and protected from unauthorized disclosure, and ultimately destroyed in an approved manner. \nInformation Security programs provides for plans, policies, procedures and training to ensure that all \nemployees are aware of the requirements for the identification, review, classification, declassification, marking, protection and proper disposal of sensitive information and classified material. In addition, operational security considerations are used to preclude inadvertent compromise. \nFunding Schedule \n(dollars in thousands) \nInformation Security FY 2005 FY 20 06 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \n Science ………………………………..….….. 3,403 3,331 3,331 0 0.0% \n National Nuclear Security Administration….... 25,477 21,398 25,145 +3,747 +17.5% \n Environmental Management………………..... 7,078 7,232 5,787 -1,445 -20.0% \n Nuclear Energy………………..………...……. 2,290 2,157 2,226 +69 +3.2% \nTotal, Information Security………………...….. 38,248 34,118 36,489 +2,371 +6.9% \nPage 164 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Cyber Security \nMission\nThe mission of Cyber Security is to ensure that sensitiv e and classified information that is electronically \nprocessed, transmitted, or stored, is properly identified and protected. Cyber Security programs also \nensure that electronic systems are appropriately marked and protected. The programs plan, document, and test classified automated infor mation systems (AIS), communications security (COMSEC), \nTEMPEST; and maintain an appropriate level of infrastructure reliability and integrity, as well as an unclassified AIS program. Included are appropriate plans, policies and procedures, assessments, tests, monitoring and self-assessments, certification s, and user and administrator training/awareness. \nFunding Schedule \n(dollars in thousands) \nCyber Security FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \n Science…………….…………….……...…... 15,708 15,415 18,070 +2,655 +17.2% \n National Nuclear Security Administration…. 99,248 90,471 88,711 -1,760 -1.9% \n Environmental Management……………...… 5,878 6,023 6,440 +417 +6.9% \n Nuclear Energy……………….……...……... 5,112 5,395 9,600 +4,205 +77.9% \nTotal, Cyber Security………………………… 125,946 117,304 12 2,821 +5,517 +4.7% \nPage 165 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Personnel Security \nMission\nThe mission of Personnel Security is to support the access authorization program (excluding Security \nInvestigations), and ensure security sensitivity through security briefings such as the initial refresher and termination briefings, re-orientations, computer based training, special workshops and classes, publications, closed circuit television programs, signs, posters and special event days. Support for the access authorization program includes: (1) personnel security assurance program, adjudications, \nscreening and analysis of personnel security cases for determining eligibility for access authorizations, \nadministrative reviews, and handling of Freedom of Information and Privacy Act requests related to security access authorizations; (2) security awareness and education; and (3) operating and maintenance estimates associated with classified/unclassified visits and assignments by foreign nationals. \nFunding Schedule \n(dollars in thousands) \nPersonnel Security FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 $ Change % Change \n Science……………………………………...…. 4,961 5,246 5,725 +479 +9.1% \n National Nuclear Security Administration…….. 25,555 27,041 28,200 +1,159 +4.3% \n Environmental Management……………….….. 8,932 8,655 8,800 +145 +1.7% \n Nuclear Energy……………….………………... 1,833 1,919 2,398 +479 +25.0% \nTotal, Personnel Security ………………………. 41,281 42,861 45,123 +2,262 +5.3% \nPage 166 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Material Control and Accountability \nMission\nThe mission of Material Control and Accountability (MC&A) is to provide assurance that nuclear \nmaterials are properly controlled and accounted for at all times. MC&A provides evidence that all nuclear materials are accounted for appropriately and that theft, diversion, or operational loss has not occurred. MC&A also supports weapons production, nuclear nonproliferation, nuclear materials operations, facility closure, and nuclear critical safety by determining and documenting the amounts of \nnuclear materials in weapons and packaged items. MC&A administration includes the following: (1) \nassessing the levels of protection, control and accounting required for the types and quantities of materials at each facility; (2) documenting facility plans for nuclear materials control and accounting; (3) assigning authorities and responsibilities for MC&A functions; (4) ensuring that facility MC&A personnel are trained and qualified to perform their responsibilities; (5) establishing programs to report occurrences such as nuclear material theft, the loss of control or inability to account for nuclear materials, or evidence of malevolent acts; (6) conducting performance testing of required program elements; and (7) establishing facility programs to conduct and document internal assessments of their \noperations and MC&A programs. \nFunding Schedule\n(dollars in thousands) \nMaterial Control and Accountab ility FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 20 07 $ Change %Change \n Science………..……………………………....… 2,363 2,385 2,341 -44 -1.8% \n National Nuclear Security Administration........... 27,018 26,889 27,940 +1,051 +3.9% \n Environmental Management………………...….. 12,459 10,718 9,716 -1,002 -9.3% \n Nuclear Energy………………..…………..……. 3,592 4,053 4,901 +848 +20.9% \nTotal, Material Control and Accountability……… 45,432 44,045 44,898 +853 +1.9% \nPage 167 Other Defense Activities/Security \nSafeguards and Security Crosscut FY 2007 Congressio nal Budget Program Management \nMission\nThe mission of Program Management is to develop a framework for efficient and effective security \noperations. This includes the development and updating of S&S plans, conducting vulnerability assessments to determine if assets are at risk, modeling to ensure the plans and operations meet mission objectives, identifying assets that need protection, developing local threat assessments and participating in the S&S quality panel process and security education. In addition, these programs ensure that plans \nare developed and revised in accordance with DOE Orders, professional and technical training is \nadministered, and goals and objectives of the Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance are implemented complex wide. \nThe programs develop S&S plans or other applicable security plans and implement S&S requirements, \nconduct surveys to determine whether S&S requirements have been implemented, respond to national and local threats and perform a vulnerability analysis that measures the risk of S&S assets. Program \nManagement includes participation in the quality panel process which raises issues from the field to the headquarters managers and ensures that the staff is properly educated with respect to security matters. \nFunding Schedule\n(dollars in thousands) \nProgram Management FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 20 07 $ Change % Change \n Science ………………………………………..…. 8,358 7,213 7,460 +247 +3.4% \n National Nuclear Security Administration….…..... 86,750 109,293 83,888 -25,405 -23.2% \n Environmental Management………………….….. 46,015 49,724 49,810 +86 +0.2% \n Nuclear Energy ……………….……………...….. 2,369 2,138 2,232 +94 +4.4% \nTotal, Program Management……………………… 143,492 168,368 143,390 -24,978 -14.8% \nPage 168" }

[ -0.010379954241216183, 0.01657184772193432, -0.03124231845140457, 0.04717760533094406, -0.0207132026553154, -0.010822386480867863, 0.021725961938500404, 0.037672799080610275, 0.06159939244389534, 0.09907641261816025, 0.10037202388048172, -0.0029785390943288803, 0.013932101428508759, -0.060334280133247375, 0.03973542898893356, -0.013791851699352264, 0.03395911678671837, -0.008719983510673046, -0.11688549816608429, 0.0021930369548499584, -0.003747637616470456, -0.00795075111091137, 0.0212591290473938, 0.0345129668712616, -0.10367343574762344, -0.019927654415369034, 0.007824576459825039, -0.04502809792757034, 0.02014259435236454, -0.05066455900669098, -0.007694560568779707, 0.023525705561041832, 0.0017589287599548697, -0.006334065925329924, 0.0392112210392952, 0.0908433347940445, 0.03461484611034393, 0.07534994930028915, -0.04732585325837135, -0.05033586174249649, -0.0006663124659098685, -0.08572441339492798, -0.03361024335026741, -0.051532380282878876, 0.04399333521723747, -0.06568508595228195, -0.0065465462394058704, -0.026399722322821617, -0.013671858236193657, -0.05862487852573395, -0.01501269917935133, -0.0703263059258461, 0.05723889172077179, -0.13482321798801422, -0.011825894005596638, -0.042477089911699295, 0.002218652283772826, -0.01813657581806183, 0.05877065286040306, -0.0838722437620163, -0.04081210494041443, 0.02086467109620571, -0.022764630615711212, -0.01372993178665638, -0.01723541133105755, -0.015609928406774998, -0.030600477010011673, -0.006445780862122774, 0.01934128627181053, -0.04536700248718262, -0.037694018334150314, 0.04248619079589844, 0.09975368529558182, 0.03388400748372078, 0.054151102900505066, -0.056824129074811935, -0.06048004329204559, 0.0021651056595146656, -0.04197169095277786, -0.012308747507631779, 0.09082350879907608, 0.06719647347927094, 0.0122807826846838, -0.06049678847193718, 0.016640866175293922, -0.10044266283512115, 0.053360551595687866, 0.033227771520614624, 0.014027778059244156, -0.016364984214305878, 0.06493044644594193, 0.019944215193390846, -0.07456347346305847, 0.0682830810546875, 0.13935445249080658, -0.014497646130621433, -0.01973312348127365, 0.021499093621969223, -0.02036896161735058, 0.04966212809085846, 0.04990358278155327, 0.08295708149671555, -0.06384043395519257, -0.016704747453331947, -0.04533040151000023, -0.049792248755693436, -0.0791211798787117, -0.006799877621233463, 0.016658984124660492, -0.0642649307847023, -0.10286970436573029, -0.03939857706427574, -0.09727074950933456, -0.05706968158483505, 0.058203358203172684, 0.03918721154332161, -0.03770100697875023, 0.01932993344962597, -0.027459649369120598, -0.014251369051635265, 0.04431644827127457, 0.006753935944288969, 0.036210671067237854, 0.02034720778465271, 0.055283017456531525, -0.06959739327430725, 0.016484417021274567, 7.460665014681327e-33, 0.056567225605249405, 0.06724545359611511, -0.014370014891028404, -0.060509033501148224, -0.04415430128574371, -0.06590927392244339, -0.005176922772079706, 0.04646371304988861, 0.061485499143600464, -0.07789508998394012, 0.061154913157224655, 0.027417587116360664, 0.08503211289644241, 0.03032081015408039, 0.014634454622864723, 0.09624774008989334, -0.0359281487762928, -0.025108054280281067, -0.036135412752628326, 0.058171987533569336, 0.04257076233625412, -0.030776597559452057, 0.06963420659303665, -0.04853367805480957, 0.008114547468721867, -0.008939503692090511, 0.02218642830848694, 0.003665209049358964, 0.021448081359267235, 0.0528351329267025, 0.023770799860358238, -0.04696013405919075, -0.04519933462142944, -0.05155552178621292, -0.03535855561494827, -0.036743659526109695, -0.01800992339849472, 0.0038610920310020447, 0.012226160615682602, -0.14300347864627838, -0.023866677656769753, -0.04630344733595848, 0.08838138729333878, 0.04024357348680496, 0.06257250905036926, 0.007090090773999691, 0.048876773566007614, 0.04123198613524437, -0.062386684119701385, 0.06298137456178665, -0.012655419297516346, -0.01616106741130352, -0.0017378509510308504, -0.05739860609173775, 0.027226416394114494, 0.04677716642618179, 0.06400556117296219, 0.10112982988357544, -0.07303573191165924, -0.030921276658773422, -0.03810771182179451, 0.03453183174133301, -0.0475691594183445, 0.04414662718772888, 0.02975924126803875, -0.026052365079522133, -0.0720553770661354, 0.032696716487407684, 0.05635694041848183, -0.08280670642852783, -0.06904136389493942, -0.013033374212682247, -0.028971858322620392, 0.019835183396935463, -0.009000983089208603, -0.10027176141738892, 0.014669612981379032, -0.006275082007050514, 0.07647642493247986, -0.02069016546010971, 0.04886564984917641, 0.009314296767115593, 0.004581065382808447, -0.10534995049238205, -0.04953080788254738, 0.008508858270943165, 0.010544618591666222, -0.040163684636354446, 0.11749186366796494, 0.028688767924904823, 0.10442797094583511, 0.03560081869363785, -0.0835435688495636, 0.07711683213710785, 0.006705311127007008, -9.593166785390471e-33, 0.07585673034191132, 0.1308048665523529, -0.11576104909181595, -0.007583722472190857, 0.07445723563432693, 0.02974840998649597, 0.005483943037688732, -0.012985292822122574, 0.004713607486337423, -0.043786197900772095, -0.03922624513506889, -0.09773185104131699, -0.05166935548186302, 0.026207314804196358, -0.0486772246658802, -0.013166720047593117, -0.06137636676430702, 0.015533537603914738, -0.00732133723795414, -0.05591428652405739, 0.018582869321107864, 0.06982717663049698, -0.00499951746314764, 0.03607282415032387, -0.01852289028465748, -0.012160545215010643, -0.019256750121712685, 0.03540012240409851, -0.037963394075632095, 0.04944794997572899, 0.07825063169002533, -0.012543715536594391, -0.023642342537641525, 0.08452272415161133, -0.05305512621998787, -0.007390871178358793, 0.02865207940340042, 0.08264939486980438, -0.056269846856594086, 0.11317440867424011, -0.042192526161670685, 0.030493032187223434, -0.025351762771606445, -0.07809428125619888, -0.0571567565202713, 0.023958181962370872, 0.05531860888004303, -0.04752415418624878, -0.007881547324359417, -0.06751364469528198, 0.014462665654718876, 0.048878263682127, 0.0037653420586138964, -0.0069588832557201385, 0.05126381665468216, 0.010495922528207302, 0.08441014587879181, -0.03050190396606922, -0.015148356556892395, 0.029447462409734726, 0.07524941116571426, -0.03452387824654579, 0.027952561154961586, 0.017203951254487038, 0.03401558846235275, -0.13927814364433289, -0.0010723741725087166, 0.04606477543711662, 0.0031084520742297173, 0.05551515147089958, -0.022601045668125153, -0.012841688469052315, -0.0682934895157814, -0.15425018966197968, 0.0484088659286499, 0.06744112819433212, -0.016467835754156113, 0.012461896054446697, -0.09093213081359863, 0.033156100660562515, 0.014708771370351315, -0.08212576806545258, -0.002756045898422599, -0.01713552698493004, -0.021085819229483604, 0.03504015877842903, 0.06262199580669403, -0.0054693822748959064, 0.005353234242647886, -0.041506461799144745, 0.008991213515400887, 0.029707299545407295, -0.007008976768702269, -0.03380915895104408, 0.00045399274677038193, -7.070588736723948e-8, 0.039235882461071014, -0.038560595363378525, 0.015467188321053982, 0.04663519561290741, 0.03900334611535072, -0.029292603954672813, -0.05604294687509537, 0.02350442484021187, -0.14018036425113678, 0.030645547434687614, -0.031026113778352737, 0.016665050759911537, -0.05622311681509018, -0.01318287942558527, 0.04648733511567116, 0.034410782158374786, 0.04489964246749878, -0.010339807718992233, -0.04288977012038231, -0.007357519585639238, 0.05994907766580582, -0.06039131432771683, -0.08516478538513184, -0.03969220817089081, -0.034628789871931076, 0.004712571855634451, 0.036033716052770615, 0.03920948505401611, 0.015759266912937164, 0.05920091271400452, 0.010576596483588219, -0.04900611191987991, -0.016336465254426003, -0.08577489852905273, -0.008950721472501755, 0.004358501639217138, -0.009526689536869526, -0.023357350379228592, 0.019719501957297325, 0.08534743636846542, 0.010364078916609287, 0.017080746591091156, 0.08702613413333893, 0.011024072766304016, 0.02450912818312645, -0.01637418568134308, -0.10204517096281052, 0.022687260061502457, 0.004187270067632198, 0.07629218697547913, 0.01993235945701599, -0.10856099426746368, -0.021343691274523735, -0.002380687976256013, 0.04734043404459953, 0.05080656334757805, -0.023859087377786636, -0.05165163055062294, -0.03761172294616699, 0.05431687459349632, 0.08905978500843048, 0.005961314309388399, -0.05991212651133537, 0.06175827980041504 ]

{ "pdf_file": "VJRDAXENL7KN3L7MPL2ARVWNE6YOL5PU.pdf", "text": "International Education Studi es; V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \nISSN 1913-9020 E-ISSN 1913-9039 \nPublished by Canadian Center of Science and Education \n251 \n EFL Teachers’ Background Knowledge is the Key to Learners’ Needs \nSalwa Al Darwish1 \n1 Public Authority for Applied Education & Training, College of Basic Education, Kuwait \nCorrespondence: Salwa Al Darwish, Public Authority for Applied Education & Training, College of Basic \nEducation, Al Shamiya, Block 9, Street 93, Kuwait. Tel: 965-9901-3946. E-mail: salwaaldarwish@hotmail.com \n Received: August 27, 2012 Accepted: October 30 , 2012 Online Published: November 14, 2012 \ndoi:10.5539/ies.v5n6p251 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v5n6p251 \n Abstract This study aimed at examining an un orthodox approach in which teacher tr ainees observe experienced teachers \nto benefit from their professional ex perience instead of the more common pr actice in which teacher trainees are \nevaluated through self-reflection and peer review. The target population was 111 teachers randomly selected by 20 teacher trainees teaching English in 20 schools within 6 school dist ricts in Kuwait. A mixed method of \nquestionnaire and observation by the teacher trainees was used for data collection. The results showed a \ndiscrepancy between the questionnaire responses and personal observation. The questionnaire responses indicated that the teachers had sign ificant confidence, high competency, and excellent performance. However, \nclassroom observation revealed that EF L teachers had to plan their classes with constraints of limited teaching \nhours and resources and mixed levels of proficiency and learning environment. Thus, Kuwaiti EFL teachers have \nthe ability, proficiency, and confiden ce to teach EFL, but lack the re quired freedom from the educational \nauthorities to implement their methods. \nKeywords: EFL teachers, instruction technique, teacher trainees, qu estionnaire, Kuwait \n1. Introduction \n1.1 Study Background \nTraditionally, language teaching has been described in terms of what teachers do: that is, in terms of the actions \nand behaviors of teachers in the classr oom and the effects of these on learners (Rea & Mercuri, 2006). Richards \nand Lockhart (2007) as well as Nunan (1 999, 2005) mentioned that regardless of the class a teacher teaches, he or \nshe is typically confronted with different kinds of tasks. For example, these tasks include observing students’ interactions, developing materials for the topic of the day, discussing reading materials, brainstorming for certain topics to write, problem solving, creating certain games to stimulate and assist students’ understandings, etc. In trying to understand how teachers deal with these tasks of teaching, it is necessary to examine the beliefs and \nthinking processes that underlie teacher s’ classroom actions through giving he r/his lessons (Krashen, 1998). Even \nthough self-observation of the teachers would be the first step in c onsciously understanding one’s weaknesses, and \nfollowed by an action plan to address those weaknesses (Richards & Renandaya, 2008), with this study self observation was not carried out by teacher trainees to observe and evaluate themselves because many teachers \nnever reflect on why they teach as they do. On the one hand, Richards also added th at self-observation gives the \nyounger teachers who are in the first st age of their careers a far greater insigh t into their own teaching habits by \nemphasizing the effective ways of improving and understanding their own teaching; on the other hand, self observation is an unfamiliar process th at might create conflict in their person al and teaching values. However, by \nobserving experienced teachers, teacher tr ainees know their current status with regard to teaching, and this helps \nthem decide what they need to do to reach their goals. In addition, Pachier and Field (2001) expressed their concern that in order to be an eff ective foreign language teacher, the indi vidual needs a commitment to keep up \nwith the recent developments in the field and a willingness to engage in continuous professional development. Therefore, observing experienced teachers would have mo re effect on newly graduate teachers than by any other \nmeans. \n1.2 Research Motivation This study was motivated by the desire to provide useful information about the strategies of instructions carried \nout by the English language teachers inside the classroom in general and the teaching of English as a Foreign \nLanguage (EFL) in Kuwaiti elementary school context specifically. Kuwaiti English education can be www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n252 \n categorized as a true foreign language learning context rather than as an English as a Second Language (ESL) \nsituation. That is, outside the classroom, English is rare ly used, and the classroom instruction is most likely the \nonly input for the target language learning. Although the learners have 12 years of foreign language education starting from elementary stage till the end of high school, these learners r eceive limited target language input and \nhave limited language learning time. B ecause of the large gap between what st udents are learning with regard to \nEFL and not ESL within the public schools in Kuwait, students show poor aca demic achievement at the \nuniversity level especially when the medium of instruction and all the text books are in English in certain colleges such as the School of Engineer, Medical School, and the College of Art and Science (2011 English Department Statistics, at CBE). So, this level of academ ic achievement stems not from lack of intelligence but \nfrom the manner of exposure to the target language English. As a preliminary step toward improving Kuwaiti English education, the present study aims at exploring and describing the actual scenario in the English classrooms in Kuwait from the teacher trainees’ perspectives, because thes e young female teacher trainees are \nprospective future teachers and are in the first stage of their careers. They will be more open to certain \nprofessional critique, especially if this critique comes from experienced teachers who have been teaching for \nmany years in this field. Furthermor e, teachers often work in isolation an d do not always have opportunities to \nbenefit from the collective expertise of their colleagues. One way to avoid this is to build in opportunities for \ncollaborative planning, for example, when teachers work together in pairs or groups on course planning, material \ndevelopment, and lesson planning. So, it is best to encourage teacher train ees to report their positive teaching \nexperiences by examining how experienced teachers conduct their lesson in side the classroom. In addition, these \nteacher trainees are more ready to take risks by implem enting new ideas gained from observation and practice, in \naddition to those they learn theoretica lly. Therefore, as explained by Koks al (2011), letting these young teacher \ntrainees observe, learn, and gain gu idance from experienced teachers w ould be more effective and acceptable \nthan guidance from any other individu al as well as self observation. \n1.3 Research Objectives \nThis study attempts to answer the following questions: 1) What teaching techniques do teachers try to implement in their classroom? \n2) To what extent is the teacher’s performance insi de the classroom similar to her response in the \nquestionnaire? \n3) What teaching resources do teachers make use of? and why? \nWith regard to the above research questions, it could be said that it is essential for the teacher trainees who are in \nthe first stage of their careers to show initial commitm ent and enthusiasm (Day, 1999). Koksal (2011), in his \narticle on English Language Teachers wo rking in elementary schools in Turk ey, explained that their main goal \nwas to improve the performance of teachers in Turkish schools, so they came up with training programs for young teachers, and renewed and shared the knowledge of experienced teachers. Therefore, it would be more \neffective if these teacher trai nees attentively watch their colleagues or e xperienced teachers so that they can get \nhelp and guidance and identify their ar eas of strength and weakness from th ese experienced teachers. If teachers \nare expected to teach well and develop their teaching skills and knowledge over time, they need ongoing support. \nThis may take a number of forms. New teachers need a careful orientation to teachi ng assignments in order to \nclarify the goals of the program, teach ing approaches, resources, problems to anticipate, and their solutions. So, \nwhen teacher trainees connect with experienced teachers fo r mentoring and support as needed during their \npracticum period, they are encouraged to set higher goals and expend more personal effort, which in the end \nimproves their self-confidence. \n1.4 Literature Review \nFor a long time in foreign/second language education, language has been viewed as an ‘object’ which is to be \nanalyzed and broken down into its smallest components (Rea & Mercuri, 2006). According to Dornyei (2007), the teacher does not consider the students empty vessels that need to be filled with words of wisdom coming \nentirely from the teacher and the course book. Therefore, th e teacher’s role has been to help students learn what \nis in the textbook that is mostly grammar driven, and the study of foreign /second language teaching has been \nlargely decontextualized and unrelated to students’ real life (Tedick & Walker, 1995). On the one hand, Phillips \nexplained that both vocabulary and grammar need to be taught in context, and should be used by students in class (2010). On the other hand, Reyes and Vallone (2008) added that gaining knowledge of what is not dependent on the individual, but on social interaction an d culturally situated contexts can motivate students to \nuse the target language and shape their communicati on competence. Morris (1995) observed that schools \ndevelop a culture, ethos, or environment that might be favorable or unfavorable to change and innovations. A www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n253 \n school with a relatively open climate, where the teachers collaborate with each other and where the principal and \nsenior teachers are supportive of younger teachers, is mo re likely to try and implement change. In contrast, a \nschool where the principle focuses on administrative matters, the teacher s work in isolation or in narrow \nsubject-based groups, and where there is no mechanism to discuss and try to solve problems is less likely to \nchange. For example, if a school encourages innovation and successful implementation of foreign language teaching, the teachers might in troduce material from English-speaking culture s. This in turn is interesting to the \nstudents because the lives of children in foreign places give a more human face to the language they are learning. \nBased on Al Dabbous and Howells ex perience (1994) with English teach ing in Kuwait, EFL exams mainly \nconcern structure in the target language that students fear and intensely dislike. They observed that the only way to acquire such knowledge is by extensive reading and listening. In language teaching history, the acquisition of \nlinguistic structures or vocabulary has been emphasized for a long time, and it has been acknowledged that structures and vocabulary is important (Richards & Renandya, 2008). However, many researchers (e.g., Widdowson, 1995; Freeman, 1998) insisted that prepara tion for communication will be inadequate if only these \nare taught. That is, they argued that students might know the rules of language usage, but would be unable to use \nthe language (Gebhard, 2005). Traditionally, language teachi ng has been explored in terms of what teachers do \nin the classroom, that is, the manner in which they carry out these tasks (Littlewood, 1992). It is, however, \nassumed that “what teachers do is a re flection of what they know and belie ve in, and that t eacher knowledge and \n‘teacher thinking’ provide th e underlying framewor k or schema which guides the teacher’s classroom actions” \n(Richards & Lockhart, 2000). It is, therefore, requir ed to examine the thinking processes which underlie \nteachers’ classroom actions (Richards & Lockhart, 2007). \nThrough his investigation of 105 EF L teachers’ practices about their language teaching, Johnson (1982) \nconcluded that “teachers teach in accordance with their th eoretical beliefs and that differences in theoretical \nbeliefs may result in differences in the nature of literacy instruction” (pp 101). Reyes and Vallone (2008) believe \nthat a teacher is effective only if her students have access to a curriculum that cl osely mirrors their culture. \nGoldfus (2011) emphasized that foreig n language teachers must direct th e attention of the foreign language \neducators toward the acquisition of the literacy within the structure and components of not only the learner's \nnative language but also the target la nguage. Also, Richards and Lockhart (2007) argued that “any language \nteaching program reflects both the cultu re of the institution as well as collective decisions and beliefs of \nindividual teachers.... Within a program or school, teach ers’ views on such things as lesson planning, use of \nobjectives, and assessment may lead to quite different classroom practices” (pp 38). Thompson (1992) noticed \nthat “teachers interact with their environment, some experience no conflict between their beliefs and their \npractice, and some learn to live with unresolved conflicts” (pp 138). Howeve r, Edge (cited in Bailey, Curtis, & \nNunan, 2001) states that working in isolation holds teachers back. \n2. Methodology 2.1 Participants and the Settings This study focused on 111 female Ku waiti EFL teachers who currently teach E nglish as a foreign language in 20 \nelementary public schools located in the 6 school distri cts in the State of Kuwait. These schools in Kuwait are \nsegregated into all-girl and all-boy schools. Only female teachers teach both genders in these schools because the \nMinistry of Education (MOE) in the State of Kuwait stip ulates this gender segregation. Like all Kuwaiti public \nschools, these buildings are enclosed within a high, fortified stone and brick wall and have an unarmed guard at the single entrance, to protect the children from intruders or other harm. Even children who are late to school are \nstopped by the guard, and must receive approval from the principal before being allowe d to enter. The standard \nelementary school day schedule throughout Kuwait runs from 7:30 a.m. to 1:20 p.m., after which the children go home to lunch (children may bring snacks to eat during breaks). The children have seven 40-minute class periods over the course of the school day, broken by a 20-minute recess period after the second class, and by a 15-minute prayer period break after the fourth class. However, no t all academic subjects receive the same amount of time. \nTwo of the daily 40-minute periods are devoted to Arabic reading and writing, and two more 40-minute periods each day are given to mathematics. Only one 40-minute period a day is sp ent on English. The remaining two \ndaily periods are divided among several subjects: science (which is studied for three periods a week), Islamic religious studies (also studied for three periods each week), social science, physical e ducation, music, and art. \nAll elementary public schools have between 10-15 teachers for different subjects and are trained to teach from 1-5 grades. For example, in each school selected for this study, there were 10-13 English language teachers who randomly teach students from grades 1-5 every year, ba sed on the school timetable and how the subjects are \ndistributed throughout the day. That is, one English teacher teaches first, second, and fifth grade for a whole \nschool year, whereas another one teaches third and fourth grade, and so on. Furthermore, children stay in a single www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n254 \n classroom throughout the day (except for recess and prayers). All teachers us e the curriculum prescribed in the \ntextbooks which are given to all teachers and students around the country by the MOE. Also, according to the regulations of the MOE, all mainstream teachers have unexpected visits from the ministry supervisors and school principals for evaluation. Because the MOE and the College of Basic Education (CBE), a college that trains and \ngraduates teachers mainly for primary levels, work clos ely together, the teacher trainees are assigned different \nschools for their practicum course. Furthermore, the 20 trainees enrolled in the practicum course had already completed a micro-teaching course, which is a core course the trainees have to pass before they graduate with a \ndegree in teaching English as a foreign language from th e CBE. As soon as the practicum course starts with \nevery semester in every school year, the CBE contacts the MOE to inform the mini stry about the number of \nstudents who will be enrolled in the practicum course. In return, the MOE will assign the schools where the \npracticum will be conducted. Then, the teacher trainees contact the assigned schools for their practicum. As soon \nas the teacher trainees arrive to these assigned schools, each of them has 2 weeks to observe mainstream teachers \nteach before she takes over one of the mainstream teachers' classrooms. The te acher trainee is just a \nnon-participating observer and sits at the back of the classroom and observes the class without interfering in it. \nBefore the beginning of the practicum course, I approached the school district authorities to get permission and \nofficial letters for the principals to guarantee access to the schools for the research. Furthermore, because the \nteacher trainees were observing the experienced teachers for their practicum , I approached the 10-13 experienced \nteachers in each school one week before the practicum started. I explained the scope of the study and got \napproval from at least 2-4 experienced teachers in each sc hool. Then, I approached the principals of these 20 \nschools and asked them to assign thes e experienced teachers who had agreed to fill out the questionnaire first \nand then the observation for the practicum course. \n2.2 The Instrument \nA non-participant observation and a questionnaire were used for this study. The questionnaire was handed to the \nexperienced teachers to be filled out by them before thei r class began. The same teacher trainee then observed \nthe experienced classroom teachers and wr ote her comments in her journal. E ach trainee had a chance to observe \n4–6 teachers per week in the assigned school (an average of 1 teacher per day) and report her observations to the \nauthor at the end of the day. The observation was carried out in the classrooms for the entire period of the class, \ni.e., 40 minutes. Based on the teacher trainees' journal, the author analyzed what was written and cross checked \nwith other trainees. The researcher's questionnaire was guided by a checklist, developed by Christison and \nBassano (1996), and used by the author as a guide for experienced teachers and teacher trainees self evaluation. \n2.3 Data Analysis \n2.3.1 Questionnaire \nTo identify the differences between categories (learn ing environment, individuals, and activities) and the \ncorresponding sub-categories in the teachers’ self-assessed performan ce, the overall score achieved by each \nteacher in each case was calculated by summing up the values of their responses. For example, a score of 9 in the \nsub-category ‘Relationship to Students’ was achieved if a teacher believed she had an excellent performance in \nall items within this subcategory (answers = 3 in all cas es). Next, scores were transformed into a proportion of \nthe maximum possible score achieved; this enabled to compare categories with different numbers of questions. For example, in the sub-category ‘Relationship to Stud ents,’ the maximum possible score was 9. For a subject \nwith a total score of 7 (two answers ‘excellent/3’ and one answer ‘improvement is needed/1’), the calculated \nproportion was 7/9 or approximately 0.77. The maximum possible score of individuals who did not respond to all questions or indicated that a question was ‘not a pplicable’ was adjusted accordingly. The author also \nconducted an exploratory analysis to examine potential associations betw een the scores in each category by \nusing Spearman rank correlations. \n2.3.2 Observation \nThe instrument on which the observation was based included the same items as the questionnaire. To ensure the \ncredibility of the teacher’s response to the questionnaire as well as to triangulate and assure the validity of the \nconclusions, the author requested the teacher trainees to observe the teacher as ma ny times as possible. The \nreason for using the same items on the questionnaire for the teacher trainees to follow in their observation is to \nallow for more rigorous comparison and contrast betw een the teacher’s response to the questionnaire and how \nshe teaches her lesson inside the classroom. Based on exploration of Kuwaiti EFL t eachers’ classroom practices, \nteacher trainees found that teaching is a very personal activity, and it is not surprising that individual teachers \nbrought to teaching very different beliefs and assumptions about what constitutes effective teaching. EFL \nteachers had their classes organized and the instructional even ts are structured to a large extent on the nature of www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n255 \n the language that students hear and use in the classroom. Th e analysis classified two sets of characteristics that \nappeared to distinguish classes that work for language learning from those that do not. The first set relates to the way the classes are structured or are or ganized for instruction, the second to the way language is used in lessons \n(Richards, 1997). Class structure as observed by the te acher trainees that EFL lessons worked effectively, \nusually followed the following procedure: \n1) A lesson began with a short statement of goals to be covered for the day and followed by a short review of \nthe previous day. \n2) New materials were presented in small steps with student practice after each step. \n3) Instructions and explanations were given in a clear and detailed manner. \n4) A high level of active practice was provided for all students. \n5) Questions were asked and then checked for student understanding and eliciting of the responses. \n6) Students were guided during initial practice. \n7) Systematic feedback and corrections were provided. \nExplicit instruction and practice were provided for paired and group work exercises, and students were \nmonitored during these work sessions. \nFurthermore, teachers mainly used tape or CD record er, where data storage devices and computers were not \navailable to them. Authentic materials and learner-centered activities were not used as often. In some classes, the \nteacher trainees reported that 58.7% of the teachers rated their performan ce from the questionnaire as excellent \nand 27.5% as good when it comes to activities and materials; however, when the teacher trainees analyzed the classroom observation, they realized th at the teachers had no power to deve lop and implement new strategies for \nEnglish teaching. The teachers acknowledged that these prob lems were fostered by the officials at the education \nministry, who discouraged English teachers from exploring or using any materials other than the required \ntextbooks and activity books. \n3. Interpretation of Results \nResponses were marked according to th e following scale: (3) Excellent, (2 ) Good, (1) Needs improvement, (0) \nNot applicable. All the data were transferred directly to SPSS for analysis. There are three main topics in the \nquestionnaire, namely learning environment, individuals and activity, under which are various sub-categories. The first category to be reviewed is the learning environm ent. This category is divided into three sub-categories, \nnamely the relationship to students, classroom, and presentation. In the second sub-category classroom, 2 questions were asked: are class arranged according to the class activity? And are materials and equipment \nneeded for a class set up before the class begins? The third sub-category presentation consisted of seven questions, each of which focused on the teachers’ presen tation skill and performance. To obtain a general view \nin the presentation field, the mean was obtained from a ll the answers provided by the participants in the seven \nquestions. The next category in the questionnaire is rela ted to individuality. This category consists of five \nsubcategories, namely, physical health, self-concepts, ap titude and perception, reinforcement, and development. \nEach subcategory contains three to fi ve statements, each of which needs to be rated by the participants according \nto their performance. The final topic in the questionnaire is “the activity” category. Th is category consists of two \nsub-categories, namely “interaction” and “language.” The first one involves seven statements, which were \nanswered by the participants in light of their teaching context. However, the la st five statements in the interaction \nsubcategory are related to what the students are saying (content) rather than erro r correcting. In addition, \nteachers rated themselves high on how these activities are geared toward the outside world. \nFigure 1 shows that in all three categories, learning environment (relationship to students, classroom, \npresentation), individuals (physical h ealth, self concepts, aptitude & percep tion, reinforcement, development), \nand activity (interaction, language), most EFL teachers rated their teaching performance positively, as indicated \nby the fact that most answers were within the 'Excellent' an d 'Good' categories. Within learning environment, \nperformance was especially high for question Q7, namely, their assessment of their voice volume in class (see \nTables 1, 2, and 3 for the corresponding question codes and their description). The results also show that the area where teachers believe there is more room for improvemen t is how students are divided into groups and based on \ncertain physical or may be cognitive features. However, te achers thought that their writing and speaking clearly \nwas not applicable due to the fact that taped materials we re mainly used inside the classroom. In addition, within \nthe same category (learning environm ent), most teachers thought they ha d an excellent presentation skills, \nwhereas as the teacher trainee observed that the teac hers were almost never communicative in the exercises www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n256 \n carried out in the classrooms. There was very little freedom and lack of predictability in what teacher or students \ndid or said. The teachers were in cont rol of the activities, and the students te nded to passively parrot the teacher’s \nEnglish words or phrases. The stude nts did not ask questions, and the teachers’ recitation and discussion \nquestions were narrow and drill-oriented and did not encourage anything besides parroting. Not only the students, but the teachers were also passive and restrictive in what they did. In the different classes around Kuwait, under \nteachers with different personalities an d ideas, the teacher trainees saw identical classes that resembled closed \ncopies of each other. The same drills were held to give children experience saying the same material, followed \nby the same games or songs, using the same handouts, wall charts, flashcards, or tape recordings. \nAfter the students practiced a new item for a few times, th e teachers often assumed that the students had learned \nit and accelerated the pace of teaching in order to move to the next item on the agenda. The overriding goal of \nthese teachers seemed to be the co mpletion of the step-by-step, class- by-class plan supplied by the MOE, \nregardless of whether they thought the students understood or were inte rested. Keeping p ace with the other \nteachers seemed to be the main priority of all the teachers. \nAlthough the majority of teacher participants have shown confidence in their performance and have rated it as \nexcellent or good, for Questions 10 and 12, namely the target language ability, less than 2% felt that language activities that lead to proficiency level as well as the information gained inside the classroom links the students to the outside world spoke the truth based on the analysis of the data collected during the observation. Almost all the students were not exposed to native-speaker pronunc iation during the English class, and many of these \nteachers modeled several grammatical errors. The class ac tivities observed by the teacher trainees consisted of \nvocabulary drills, exercises, and games, almost entirely without translation, and the meanings of words were \nindicated contextually by pictures or gestures. The entire class would ch orus the answers first, and later, \nindividual students would be ca lled on. The teacher trainees noticed that some students seemed more proficient \nand knowledgeable than others, and that classes often ended with some students still not seeming to understand \nthe vocabulary. Students’ mistakes we re not corrected at once, but were ignored, to avoid their discouragement \nor humiliation; later, the teacher or anot her student would model the correct answer. \nFigure 2 confirms that self-assessment rating was highly positive and consistent across categories, as indicated \nby the observation of the graph, that in all cases scor es were close to the maximu m possible score within each \ncategory. However, most of the teach ers considered themselves as good within all the subcategories. \nThe exploratory correlation analyses conducted (Figure 3) indicates a high degree of consistency in the answers \nto the questionnaire by each teacher. As shown in the figure, with the exception of the asso ciation between the \nscores of ‘Relationship to Students’ and ‘Language’ (not significant: NS in the graph), all correlations were significant. The strongest association (darkest square in Figure 3) was between the scores of the categories \n‘Aptitude & Perception’ and ‘Reinforcement’. This result indicates that a strong positive correlation between the \ntwo variables. However, if we look at the same figure 3, the scores for self-concepts and the interaction and the \ndevelopment and language were very low compared to the other categories. However, based on the classrooms observations, the teachers showed lack of accuracy in terms of implementing the technique, such as active \ninvolvement in language use and student-centered ac tivities. Throughout the period of teacher trainees’ \nobservation, not only novice teachers but more experi enced teachers also followed these lessons based on the \nteacher’s manual provided by the MOE, mostly with out any deviation, just like actors following a script. The \nteachers seemed convinced that they were required to do this by the MOE. Students’ competence and \nunderstanding often seemed to be irrelevant. Therefore, instruction tended to resemble “parrot learning,” in \nwhich many students made sounds without knowing why. \nThe lessons in the manual are also fairly teacher-centere d, and became even more so because the teachers did not \nintroduce pair work or small group work, although it is permitted by the manual. A teacher-centered approach is \nclearly necessary to some degree w ith novice students. But the manual do es not suggest, for instance, that \nstudents might ask for the English names of objects they bring to class or for the English names for Arabic words, a communicative activity that would have kept the students interested. Presum ably this is because such activities \ncould have involved some translation (or perhaps becaus e the teachers might not always have known the English \nwords). \n www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n257 \n Table 1. Frequency of responses of EFL teachers to questions related to their learning environment. \n Questions Answers \n 0 1 2 3 B Total \nRelationship with students 1. I establish good eye contact with my class. I do not talk over \ntheir heads, to the blackboard, or to just one individual. \n2. If I tend to teach predominan tly to one area of the classroom, I \nam aware of this. I make a conscious effort at all times to pay \nattention to all students equally. \n3. I divide my students into small groups in an organized and \nprincipled manner. I recognize that these groups should differ in size and composition, varying with the objective of the group \nactivity. Classroom 4. I arrange the seating in my class to suit the class activity for \nthe day. \n5. When I need special materials or equipment, I have them set \nup before the class begins. Presentation 6. My handwriting on the blackboard and charts is legible from \nall locations in the classroom. It is large enough to accommodate \nstudents with vision impairments. \n7. I speak loudly enough to be heard in all parts of the classroom \nand I enunciate clearly. \n8. I vary the exercises in class, alternating rapid and slow paced \nactivities to keep up maximum interest level in the class. \n9. I am prepared to give a variety of explanations, models or \ndescriptions, understanding that one explanation may not be \nsufficient for all students. \n10. I help the students form working principles and \ngeneralizations. \n11. I use new skills or concepts long enough so that they are \nretained and thus future application is possible. \n12. I plan for “thinking time” for my students so that they can \norganize their thoughts and plan wh at they are going to say or \ndo. \nNote: Teachers were asked to thoughtfully consider eac h statement and rate themselves in the following way: \n(3) Excellent, (2) Good, (1) Needs improvement and (0) Not applicable. Column denoted as ‘B’ in the table \nrepresents the frequency of blank answers. The total represents the sum of valid (non-blank) responses. \n www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n258 \n Table 2. Frequency of responses of EFL teachers to questions related to 'Individual' (Students) in their classes. \n Questions 0 1 2 3 B Total\nPhysical Health 1. I know which students have visual or aural impairments and make \nthem seat as close to my usua l teaching position as possible. \n2. I am aware that a student’s attention span varies from day to day \ndepending on mental and physical health and external distractions. I pace my class activities to accommodate the strengths. I don’t continue \nwith an activity which may exhaust or bore them. \n3. I begin my class with a simple activity to wake the students up and \nget them working together. \n4. I am sensitive to individual students who have bad days. I don’t \npress a student who is incapable of performing at the usual level. \n5. I try to challenge students who are at their best. \n6. If I am having a bad day and feel it might affect my normal teaching \nstyle, I let my students know so there is no misunderstanding about my feelings for them. Self-Concept 7. I treat my students with the same respect that I expect them to show \nme. \n8. I plan “one-centered” activities which give all students an \nopportunity at some point to feel important and accepted. \n9. I like to teach and have a good time teaching — on most days. Aptitude Perception 10. I am aware that my students l earn differently. Some students are \nvisual-receptive, some are motor-r eceptive, and others are audio- \nreceptive \n11. My exercises are varied, some are visual, aural, oral and \nkinesthetic. I provide models, examples, and experiences to maximize learning in each of these areas \n12. I know basic concepts in the memory process. When applicable, I \nmake use of techniques such as backward buildup and association to aid students in rapid skill acquisition. Reinforcement 13. I tell students when they have done well, but I don’t let praise \nbecome mechanical. \n14. I finish my class period in a way which will review the new \nconcepts presented during the class period. My students can immediately evaluate their unde rstanding of those concepts. \n15. My tests are well-planned and produced. \n16. I make’ my system of grading clea r to my students so that there are \nno misunderstandings of expectations. Development 17. I keep myself updated on new t echniques in the ESL profession by \nattending conferences and work shops and by reading pertinent \nprofessional articles and books. \n18. I realize that there is no one ri ght way to present any lesson. I try \nnew ideas where and when they seem appropriate. \n19. I observe other EFL teachers so that I can get other ideas and \ncompare them to my own teaching st yle. I want to have several ideas \nfor teaching any one concept. \nNote: Teachers were asked to thoughtf ully consider each statemen t and rate themselves in the following way: (3) \nExcellent, (2) Good, (1) Needs improvement and (0) Not applicable. Column denoted as 'B' represents the frequency \nof blank answers. The total represents the sum of valid (non-blank) responses. www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n259 \n Table 3. Frequency of responses of EFL teachers to questions related to 'Activities' in classes. \n Questions 0 1 2 3 B Total\nInteraction 1. I minimize my role in conducting the activities. \n2. I organize the activities so that they are suitable for real-world interaction \n3. The activities maximize student involvement \n4. The activities promote spontaneity or experimentation on the part of the \nlearner. \n5. The activities generally transfer atte ntion away from “self” and outward \ntoward a “task . “ \n6. The activities are organi zed to insure a high su ccess rate, leaving enough \nroom for error to make the activity challenging. \n7. I am not overly concerned with erro r correction. I concentrate on what my \nstudents are saying (content). Language 8. The activity is focused. \n9. The content or the skill presented will be easily transferable for use outside \nthe class. \n10. The activity is geared to the proficiency level of my class or slightly \nbeyond. \n11. The content of the activity is not too sophisticated for, my students. \n12. I make the content of the activity relevant and meaningful to my \nstudents’ world. \nNote: Teachers were asked to thoughtfu lly consider each statement and rate themselves in the following way: (3) \nExcellent, (2) Good, (1) needs Improvement, (0) Not applicable. Column denoted as 'B' represents the frequency \nof blank answers. The total represents the sum of valid (non-blank) responses. \n \n4. Conclusion \nOne of our greatest challenges as we prepare teachers for the complexity of foreign language instruction is to \ncontinue to believe that we are preparing teachers to make change. Through the micro-teaching and the \npracticum courses, we stress the disparities between what we might want to see in classrooms and what they are \nactually experiencing in schools. Teacher trainees often re port with delight the opportunity to work alongside a \ntrue mentor (classroom teacher), a teacher with a belief that second language inst ruction is challenging but \nwonderful. In other wo rds, teacher trainees should take the initiative to work with colleagues for their own \ndevelopment; by this way, they can ga in an inside perspective on other teachers’ experiences and raise their \nawareness through reflecting on their own teaching. \nGenerally speaking, most teachers seem to be confident as the data has show n that all the answers were mainly \neither excellent or good. Figure 1 su mmarizes the answers to th e research question (1-3). It indicates that the \nteachers have high level of performa nce in relation to the items on the questionnaire based on the three main \ncategories: learning environment, in dividuals, and activity. It is worth co nsidering that a few teachers who \nparticipated in this research and chose the “not appli cable” answer were mostly those who not only felt it was \nirrelevant to teach English but also did not properly teach English in their classes. \nAccording to the note-taking during the observations, it is apparent that the teachers do not perform in the same \nway as stated in the questionnaire. The teachers felt that they had insufficient opportunities in which they could \nmake mistakes without being judged; therefore, it was better for them to follow the syllabus and the teacher’s \nmanual. They also experienced difficulty finding opportu nities to reflect upon their own performance and to \nidentify and address the r eal needs of learners. \nPeer observation and reflection on own teaching are considered as importan t by teacher trainees because this \nhelps them in search of learning and adapting to new teaching environment through observing their fellow peers and reflecting on their own teaching once they start this prof ession. In this study, all teachers rated themselves as www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n260 \n high as possible for the categories assessed on the questionnaire. They gave themselves higher score regardless \nof the quality of their performance as was observed. Furthermore, teachers need ed to feel secure in EFL teaching \nenvironment. Consequently, they experienced anxiety and fr ustration. This frustration became apparent after the \nadministration of the questionnaire. Thus, there should be a technique for comprehensive and objective self observation for teachers. Howe ver, because the questionnaire was used as against observation, the teacher did \nnot feel a sense of security in EFL teaching environmen t. The findings indicate that the participants (teachers) \nconceptualized practice in concern with their beliefs ab out English learning, teaching, their teacher role, and \nunique context factors, but in reality, they were mere ly following the guidelines of the MOE of Kuwait. \n4.1 Study Limitations \nOne limitation of this study was the presence of the teac her trainee as an observer for the experienced teacher, \nwhich was awkward decision to follow. Second, the findin gs of this study cannot be generalized to the entire \npopulation of English teachers, because this study dealt only with elem entary school teachers. Finally, the study \nfocused on Kuwaiti elementary school English teachers worki ng in public elementary sc hools. Information about \nteachers in private schools and about foreign t eachers were not included in this article. \n4.2 Future Direction for the Research The Ministry of Education should relax its curriculum guide lines so that creative teachers feel free do their best \nteaching. The official curriculum has no t served as a framework of goals, within which the teachers may develop \ntheir own teaching styles, but instead has been functioning as a straitjacket, imposing unimaginative, curriculum-centered teaching. Instead of laying out lesson plans for the entire year, the teachers’ manual might \nset learning goals, and then offer a rich array of teaching techniques and materials for teachers to choose among \nin developing their own lesson plans. \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nFigure 1. Percentage distribution of teacher responses to each of the questionnaire items in each of the categories \nassessed (learning environment, individuals, and activities) . For a description of questionnaire items (Q1, Q2, \nand so on), please refer to Tables 1, 2, and 3. \n www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n261 \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nFigure 2. Box plot showing the pe rformance of EFL teachers based on their answers to a self-assessment \nquestionnaire (Table 1). Answers are re presented as the proportion of the maximum possible score in each of the \nsubcategories shown. Major categories are differentiated by colors. Black: learning environment; Grey: \nindividuals; White: activities. The line represents median values. \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nFigure 3. Exploratory correlation an alyses between the EFL teacher responses to a self-assessment questionnaire \n(as based on each teacher’s total score in each subcat egory). The color map on the right side of the graph \nrepresents Spearman rank correlation coefficients, with darker shades representing hi gher coefficients. With the \nexception of the association between th e scores of ‘Relationship to Students’ and ‘Language’ (not significant: \nNS in the graph), all correlations are significant at p < 0.05 (two-tailed). \n \nReferences \nAl-Dabbous, J., & Howells, G. (1994). Teacher training: A textbook for teachers on English in Kuwait. Kuwait: \nKuwait University, Al-Assriya Press. \nBailey, K. M., Curtis, A., & Nunan, D. (2001). Pursuing professional devel opment: The self as source . Boston, \nMA: Heinle & Heinle. \nChristison, M. N., & Bassano, S. (1996). Teacher self-observation. TESOL , 18(4), 17-19. \nDay, C. (1999). Developing teachers: The challenges of lifelong learning . London: Falmer Press. \n www.ccsenet.org/ies International Edu cation Studies V ol. 5, No. 6; 2012 \n262 \n Dornyei, Z. (2007). Motivational strategies in the language classroom (pp 106). Cambridge: Cambridge \nUniversity Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667343 \nFreeman, Y., & Freeman D. (1998). ESL/EFL teaching: Principles for success . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. \nGebhard, J. (2005). Teaching English as a foreign or second language . Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of \nMichigan Press. \nGoldfus, C. (2011). The challenges f acing the foreign language teacher e ducator: A proposed teacher education \nmodel for EFL. Journal of NELTA, 16 (1-2) , 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/nelta.v16i1-2.6125 \nJohnson, K. (1982). Communicative syllabus design and methodology . Oxford: Oxford University Press. http:// \ndx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/37.2.184 \nKoksal, H. (2011). Quality journey of Turkey from the perspective of language teachers. Journal of NELTA, \n16(1-2), 52-58. http://dx.doi.org/103126/nelta.v16i1-2.6129 \nKrashen, S. D. (1998). Foreign language education: The easy way . Culver City, CA: Language Education \nAssociates. \nLittlewood, W. (1992). Foreign and second language learning . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. \nMorris, P. (1995). The Hong Kong school curriculum. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. \nNunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning . Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. \nNunan, D. (2005). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. \nPachier, N., & Field, K. (2001). Learning to teach modern languages in the secondary school . London: \nRoutledge. \nPhillips, S. (2010). Resource books for teachers: Young learners (20th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. \nRea, D., & Mercuri, S. (2006). Research-based strategies for English language learners . Portsmouth, NH: \nHeinemann. \nReyes, S. A., & Vallone, T. L. (2008). Constructivist strategies for teaching English language learners . \nThousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, A Sage Company. \nRichards, C. J. (1997). The language teaching matrix . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. \nRichards, J. C., & Lockhart, C. (2007). Reflective teaching in second language classroom . Cambridge: \nCambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667169 \nRichards, J., & Renandya, W. (2008). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp \n255). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190 \nTedick, D. J., & Walker, C. L. (199 5). From theory to practice: How we prepare teachers for second language \nclassrooms. Foreign Language Annals, 28, 499-517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1995.tb00823.x \nThompson, A. G. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and conceptions: a synthesis of the research . New York: Macmillan \nPublishing Company. \nWiddowson, H. G. (1995). Disc ourse analysis: A critical view. Language and Literature, 4 (3), 157-172. \nhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096394709500400301. " }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "SQSXIT5KUD33XPR7ABPDCGW4XGQGAQYH.pdf", "text": "" }

[ -0.044614024460315704, 0.04885394126176834, 0.0001466604444431141, 0.010728761553764343, -0.027964478358626366, 0.02640950120985508, -0.013187786564230919, -0.042151808738708496, -0.04154143109917641, 0.015224534086883068, 0.011886294931173325, -0.06576418876647949, -0.036837995052337646, -0.0026703104376792908, -0.13324299454689026, -0.04833858460187912, 0.042269326746463776, 0.030171161517500877, 0.003249571891501546, 0.014969339594244957, 0.006163245067000389, -0.032169997692108154, 0.05969763547182083, -0.05808763951063156, -0.08617570251226425, 0.06514345109462738, -0.10948394984006882, -0.030276061967015266, -0.03855959326028824, -0.03243279457092285, -0.08511951565742493, -0.023360000923275948, 0.018732771277427673, -0.004628924652934074, 0.08153839409351349, 0.028954988345503807, 0.0611199252307415, 0.029876945540308952, 0.06473731994628906, 0.0004699347191490233, -0.03734542056918144, 0.008554480038583279, 0.055808842182159424, -0.0620100311934948, -0.07971221208572388, -0.07652311772108078, -0.043785881251096725, -0.10714352130889893, -0.0534256286919117, 0.032325245440006256, -0.024018945172429085, -0.030080748721957207, 0.04586410894989967, 0.019410228356719017, -0.04616042599081993, -0.03803765028715134, 0.019939152523875237, 0.013637667521834373, -0.07624106109142303, -0.03841494768857956, -0.014767562039196491, 0.08395477384328842, -0.03995664790272713, 0.06833676248788834, 0.0009355463553220034, 0.020064078271389008, -0.05541538447141647, -0.005844432394951582, 0.024294504895806313, -0.09326229244470596, -0.052148547023534775, -0.005681703798472881, -0.06263789534568787, -0.09094418585300446, 0.013002827763557434, 0.04663511738181114, 0.014135617762804031, 0.05555494502186775, 0.07855965197086334, -0.12448146939277649, 0.042008332908153534, -0.006168735679239035, 0.09721443802118301, 0.029270479455590248, 0.0021733175963163376, 0.010984684340655804, -0.011789817363023758, -0.09998870640993118, 0.013168484903872013, 0.012646572664380074, 0.14031624794006348, 0.042509615421295166, 0.005584839731454849, -0.1530521810054779, 0.08237644284963608, 0.025806080549955368, -0.10284194350242615, -0.018918316811323166, 0.03394269943237305, 0.04231186583638191, 0.07134687900543213, 0.06730946898460388, -0.007614970672875643, -0.050375379621982574, 0.004977570381015539, -0.013539035804569721, 0.05824113264679909, 0.004229475278407335, -0.029443804174661636, 0.043517839163541794, 0.06082404777407646, 0.08082215487957001, 0.004561670124530792, -0.04710175096988678, 0.06317958980798721, 0.017848005518317223, -0.06683237850666046, 0.013005570508539677, 0.0225049015134573, 0.03022029623389244, 0.00008972750947577879, 0.02246621437370777, -0.036275796592235565, 0.014515659771859646, 0.06739980727434158, 0.023131730034947395, 0.00790244247764349, -1.9807970615668277e-33, 0.030849820002913475, 0.050844233483076096, -0.0241522416472435, -0.04353133216500282, -0.0565401166677475, 0.04952413588762283, -0.03588821738958359, -0.00408925861120224, -0.01573345437645912, 0.04921320453286171, -0.08073986321687698, 0.04023599997162819, -0.038022611290216446, -0.11182975769042969, -0.022042278200387955, 0.07084720581769943, 0.002366711152717471, 0.08401485532522202, -0.024054957553744316, 0.018814483657479286, 0.033264655619859695, -0.07613794505596161, 0.04744338244199753, -0.042601317167282104, 0.0286985132843256, -0.027035489678382874, -0.04950236156582832, 0.05845598131418228, -0.04406837746500969, -0.005721788853406906, 0.020405597984790802, 0.025317858904600143, 0.10571551322937012, 0.04077044874429703, -0.016461092978715897, 0.013556871563196182, 0.05731664597988129, 0.011857477016746998, -0.0015745052369311452, -0.06666256487369537, -0.028995247557759285, 0.04439195618033409, 0.01841476559638977, 0.005915396846830845, 0.012909392826259136, -0.013632914051413536, 0.0032849821727722883, 0.0008895326755009592, 0.07744265347719193, -0.008610936813056469, -0.020161310210824013, 0.034522052854299545, -0.08614008873701096, 0.016605062410235405, -0.08817419409751892, 0.030340172350406647, 0.015195666812360287, -0.009715631604194641, 0.02661440148949623, 0.06972294300794601, 0.02224835939705372, 0.0546884685754776, -0.07909858226776123, -0.048039406538009644, -0.028599007055163383, -0.06242142245173454, -0.033115286380052567, -0.013493991456925869, 0.0585574246942997, -0.013774693943560123, -0.1341402232646942, -0.036195527762174606, -0.00222650240175426, 0.029136737808585167, 0.03446388617157936, -0.020591676235198975, 0.06660576909780502, 0.02011491172015667, 0.0283354539424181, 0.013495121151208878, -0.0554799810051918, -0.0761323943734169, -0.005877958610653877, 0.06805926561355591, 0.04890630021691322, -0.014796268194913864, 0.01819794252514839, -0.005701479967683554, 0.0020539378747344017, 0.04325372725725174, 0.061951909214258194, -0.02729577012360096, -0.03170106187462807, 0.04863353446125984, 0.0271048191934824, -3.163287624157423e-33, 0.014795280061662197, 0.013472417369484901, -0.041489265859127045, -0.059899140149354935, -0.0167220551520586, -0.018540415912866592, -0.049789220094680786, -0.0648503229022026, 0.008797239512205124, -0.027685994282364845, -0.0034350361675024033, -0.03560880944132805, 0.005978733766824007, 0.04309433698654175, -0.035522885620594025, -0.004561281763017178, -0.0031433538533747196, -0.0016140731750056148, -0.004190996289253235, 0.05213388800621033, 0.11037883162498474, 0.08661022037267685, -0.013673994690179825, 0.08791511505842209, -0.06890146434307098, 0.04761902987957001, 0.014770036563277245, -0.05833117291331291, -0.00851594377309084, 0.05939725786447525, -0.008185186423361301, -0.03464902564883232, -0.019781246781349182, 0.10897000133991241, -0.004089680500328541, -0.1113123968243599, 0.07001910358667374, -0.04230574145913124, -0.07353729754686356, 0.06934018433094025, 0.03897431120276451, 0.03739301115274429, -0.015162967145442963, 0.0490059033036232, 0.047788262367248535, -0.031826842576265335, -0.00878109224140644, 0.043014828115701675, -0.07104729861021042, -0.03328506276011467, -0.11093389987945557, -0.058857694268226624, -0.05465775355696678, 0.0327901728451252, 0.0015952916583046317, 0.09774057567119598, 0.06996674090623856, -0.04747018218040466, -0.0814523920416832, 0.047470565885305405, -0.03047608770430088, 0.15183985233306885, -0.06907650828361511, 0.035128772258758545, 0.1004251018166542, -0.030317841097712517, 0.011572069488465786, -0.027945702895522118, -0.049122154712677, -0.04187260568141937, -0.045243848115205765, -0.1561857908964157, 0.0173020176589489, -0.04543858766555786, 0.055965133011341095, 0.03526526689529419, -0.03961804881691933, -0.082770936191082, -0.03721333295106888, 0.02379646711051464, -0.007003585807979107, 0.04254498705267906, 0.02357410453259945, -0.0038608473259955645, -0.0005278480821289122, 0.02987026423215866, 0.0866423174738884, -0.07671583443880081, 0.01858443208038807, 0.03569609671831131, -0.0011402522213757038, -0.06613553315401077, -0.01773224212229252, -0.03587717190384865, 0.04070479795336723, -4.8860780310633345e-8, -0.011814604513347149, 0.04646003618836403, -0.001951343845576048, 0.025213662534952164, 0.009723672643303871, -0.09370757639408112, -0.0282196793705225, -0.0333089679479599, -0.09817499667406082, -0.018297413364052773, 0.029122361913323402, 0.06708923727273941, -0.08214078843593597, -0.09513363242149353, 0.024474769830703735, -0.059944458305835724, -0.05761616304516792, 0.02345006726682186, -0.07959464937448502, -0.024796076118946075, -0.057551756501197815, -0.027731778100132942, -0.062102507799863815, -0.00620275316759944, -0.014621593989431858, -0.04625692963600159, -0.04038252308964729, 0.057763874530792236, 0.06202905625104904, 0.02515368163585663, 0.015068077482283115, 0.056966084986925125, 0.05845031142234802, -0.06117909029126167, -0.019311653450131416, -0.028811419382691383, 0.040514055639505386, -0.002258285880088806, 0.08338942378759384, -0.024824002757668495, -0.02892174944281578, -0.07245294004678726, 0.05111438408493996, 0.015624256804585457, -0.026304779574275017, 0.011313823983073235, -0.0152510367333889, -0.03938402980566025, 0.11125694960355759, -0.046215906739234924, 0.01741059310734272, -0.03902100771665573, 0.01769351214170456, 0.08021754026412964, 0.03195662423968315, 0.003907553385943174, 0.006968858651816845, 0.005522038321942091, -0.003979792818427086, -0.07846204936504364, 0.08551736176013947, 0.01977374032139778, 0.05302197113633156, -0.041115522384643555 ]

{ "pdf_file": "RDQEO3IHCUXHQO3INBQKLFGDQOCQJ2QS.pdf", "text": "REPORT DIGEST\nDEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS\nILLINOIS RIVER CORRECTIONAL CENTER\nREPORT ON STATE COMPLIANCE TESTING\nFOR THE TWO YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 1992\nFINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nThere are no compliance findings in this report. The Center is to be commended for maintaining \ngood fiscal controls.\nWe conducted a compliance audit of the Center as required by the Illinois State Auditing Act. \nWe also performed certain agreed upon procedures with respect to the accounting records of the \nCenter to assist our single audit of the entire Department. Financial statements for the \nDepartment will be presented in the single audit report.\n_______________________________________\nWILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General\nWGH:RR:pp\nSUMMARY OF AUDIT FINDINGS\nNumber ofThis AuditPrior Audit\nAudit findings0 2\nRepeated audit findings0 0\nPrior recommendations implemented\n or not repeated2 0\nSPECIAL ASSISTANT AUDITORS\nHill, Taylor & Co. were our special assistant auditors for this audit. " }

[ -0.12242474406957626, 0.08795485645532608, -0.06260979920625687, -0.027311764657497406, 0.09336679428815842, 0.042877256870269775, 0.012486264109611511, 0.05457212030887604, -0.015019173733890057, 0.008962409570813179, 0.12577849626541138, 0.0051558054983615875, 0.01900460757315159, -0.044318150728940964, -0.06232862547039986, 0.024200530722737312, -0.0646635964512825, 0.02826775051653385, 0.02227063477039337, -0.009854063391685486, -0.041058581322431564, 0.036354515701532364, 0.02821040339767933, -0.0461672879755497, 0.007481208071112633, 0.08176698535680771, -0.021493319422006607, 0.05148107558488846, 0.02651108242571354, -0.05143735185265541, -0.011404164135456085, 0.018131256103515625, 0.02506653405725956, 0.04661732539534569, 0.05157003551721573, -0.009503144770860672, -0.011411418206989765, -0.005692324601113796, -0.00908636674284935, -0.003612155094742775, 0.04655338078737259, -0.04411524161696434, 0.06234060600399971, 0.08882829546928406, 0.007881063967943192, 0.01745530217885971, -0.052733972668647766, 0.010281866416335106, -0.023893659934401512, 0.02546364814043045, -0.036543525755405426, -0.08332998305559158, -0.03829553723335266, 0.10147758573293686, -0.03197063133120537, -0.050553303211927414, -0.04870874062180519, 0.004631693474948406, 0.03997064754366875, 0.01862393319606781, 0.023535137996077538, -0.0006511645042337477, -0.014454588294029236, 0.029714589938521385, 0.05374796688556671, -0.02880251035094261, 0.052478764206171036, -0.06631490588188171, 0.07508302479982376, 0.004884532652795315, 0.02658015303313732, 0.024709727615118027, -0.06750695407390594, -0.03583596274256706, -0.08137288689613342, 0.07665952295064926, 0.0020484502892941236, 0.022684892639517784, 0.039068713784217834, -0.15336066484451294, -0.035573121160268784, 0.004827424418181181, -0.00567026250064373, 0.001472917152568698, 0.06948202848434448, 0.020420614629983902, -0.047919824719429016, -0.045046210289001465, 0.008580873720347881, 0.045590586960315704, 0.06552165001630783, -0.012174475938081741, 0.05292503163218498, 0.009314030408859253, -0.08335136622190475, -0.005571712274104357, 0.0442318469285965, 0.0829639881849289, 0.02635086514055729, 0.05292598158121109, -0.04321782663464546, -0.0271794181317091, -0.0013665613951161504, 0.051506198942661285, 0.026661425828933716, -0.028695644810795784, -0.0285843163728714, 0.07041746377944946, -0.0764111801981926, -0.07056955248117447, 0.0242538470774889, 0.0808643102645874, 0.03895856812596321, -0.021102625876665115, 0.040722642093896866, 0.06088142469525337, 0.05123892053961754, 0.09002897143363953, -0.016942348331212997, -0.019998740404844284, -0.008179849945008755, 0.012429359368979931, -0.0819963738322258, -0.048456668853759766, -0.1733163297176361, -0.08161143213510513, 0.015106629580259323, 8.303612013655989e-33, 0.04040031135082245, -0.08309611678123474, -0.04841654375195503, 0.020172348245978355, 0.054036203771829605, 0.03404491767287254, -0.011903980746865273, -0.016562342643737793, -0.05893857404589653, 0.050232965499162674, 0.000014174831449054182, -0.05563058704137802, 0.06973946839570999, -0.11955316364765167, -0.076982781291008, 0.01674014702439308, -0.04680546745657921, 0.04131186008453369, -0.06788233667612076, -0.009583396837115288, 0.09391558170318604, 0.012348168529570103, 0.012133910320699215, 0.025559281930327415, -0.012367738410830498, 0.04937301203608513, 0.04882749542593956, -0.05101028457283974, 0.02947874739766121, 0.026998912915587425, 0.07035831362009048, 0.007238299585878849, 0.05525828152894974, 0.0013360021403059363, 0.06777454167604446, 0.1128481924533844, 0.02162085846066475, -0.05883920192718506, 0.02356056123971939, -0.027221180498600006, 0.007405339274555445, -0.02928684465587139, -0.007649142295122147, -0.04636785015463829, 0.02156173065304756, -0.09092368930578232, 0.0032245656475424767, 0.00171892368234694, -0.031804122030735016, 0.041957732290029526, -0.006995623465627432, 0.01835579052567482, 0.007857921533286572, -0.044266603887081146, -0.06746542453765869, -0.014774929732084274, -0.028644142672419548, 0.0759599357843399, 0.03280491381883621, 0.06778666377067566, 0.05900992825627327, 0.10184342414140701, -0.12817862629890442, 0.005467133596539497, -0.05367524176836014, -0.038970544934272766, -0.03246515244245529, -0.09744866192340851, -0.023061182349920273, -0.03858189657330513, 0.01765565387904644, -0.015514327213168144, 0.07590214163064957, -0.0279270950704813, -0.052088912576436996, -0.032938312739133835, -0.06155310943722725, 0.03380220755934715, -0.07817859947681427, -0.056699253618717194, -0.11513224244117737, 0.012086999602615833, -0.0036589300725609064, 0.002748318947851658, -0.0007470162818208337, 0.045566439628601074, -0.038764096796512604, -0.06630230695009232, -0.10255234688520432, 0.009412258863449097, 0.03745632991194725, 0.02948233112692833, 0.022791657596826553, 0.006203606724739075, 0.028818773105740547, -6.850083126821491e-33, -0.02794448658823967, -0.031994812190532684, -0.015497276559472084, -0.01585865020751953, 0.042422935366630554, -0.05598631501197815, 0.011458859778940678, 0.033470798283815384, -0.05394121631979942, -0.03944747522473335, 0.07894781976938248, -0.058915816247463226, -0.014975512400269508, 0.06236283853650093, -0.014096366241574287, 0.028230344876646996, -0.020934665575623512, 0.05246081203222275, -0.08297926187515259, 0.053155940026044846, 0.10522729158401489, 0.04825683310627937, 0.022106803953647614, 0.09785428643226624, -0.01055919099599123, 0.0026617294643074274, 0.04032353311777115, 0.018475648015737534, -0.004077224060893059, 0.04944232851266861, 0.0035769406240433455, -0.023435218259692192, -0.13671505451202393, 0.11383125931024551, 0.009502642787992954, -0.09590142965316772, 0.038449134677648544, -0.027157586067914963, 0.009527623653411865, 0.061336711049079895, 0.07296203821897507, 0.02628638595342636, -0.0012768242741003633, 0.07585963606834412, -0.0028799097053706646, 0.086150161921978, 0.11567659676074982, 0.007610343862324953, 0.05438915640115738, -0.03923601657152176, -0.016085486859083176, 0.01751573383808136, 0.03882920742034912, 0.11433469504117966, 0.006318654399365187, 0.017962168902158737, 0.07950854301452637, -0.06738871335983276, -0.03525504097342491, -0.014487149193882942, 0.0884058028459549, 0.04554496705532074, -0.049235403537750244, 0.00487199192866683, 0.12489698827266693, -0.0004862502100877464, -0.033241596072912216, 0.03251394256949425, 0.06445741653442383, -0.07678496092557907, 0.005442927125841379, -0.03245524689555168, 0.03223991021513939, -0.11830808222293854, 0.009289427660405636, -0.041592489928007126, -0.04158470034599304, 0.021468328312039375, -0.07064945250749588, -0.022188736125826836, 0.004829568322747946, -0.047124892473220825, 0.0060899448581039906, 0.060713086277246475, 0.012099633924663067, 0.014195469208061695, 0.07358868420124054, -0.060463447123765945, 0.015189435333013535, 0.016785452142357826, -0.0966108962893486, 0.02254175767302513, 0.04313747212290764, 0.010365726426243782, -0.004470378626137972, -4.01442505904015e-8, -0.06758865714073181, -0.0275054220110178, -0.031718794256448746, -0.024258609861135483, 0.09564336389303207, -0.0014777356991544366, -0.038177017122507095, -0.02269010990858078, -0.04826110228896141, 0.006425617728382349, 0.018098682165145874, 0.03677268698811531, -0.04743298515677452, -0.08702360093593597, 0.012293738313019276, -0.04094523936510086, -0.09850145876407623, 0.027679787948727608, -0.02646765671670437, -0.027412699535489082, -0.01353792566806078, -0.0652063861489296, 0.07396158576011658, 0.04923335462808609, -0.02579992264509201, 0.07608446478843689, 0.019694872200489044, 0.040441855788230896, 0.017096316441893578, -0.0281203705817461, -0.04414958506822586, 0.044429078698158264, 0.03724515065550804, -0.0332280695438385, -0.0578056275844574, 0.016477379947900772, 0.04163780063390732, 0.016543297097086906, 0.005980325397104025, -0.03808848559856415, -0.026243075728416443, -0.0012345373397693038, 0.02174529992043972, 0.08998273313045502, 0.009407575242221355, -0.004608834162354469, -0.033657606691122055, -0.005145758390426636, -0.05099446699023247, -0.06650716066360474, -0.017452051863074303, -0.11498080939054489, 0.027376540005207062, 0.007645866833627224, -0.08672603964805603, 0.016267821192741394, 0.06865034252405167, 0.0038949076551944017, -0.04562392458319664, -0.018117448315024376, 0.010316675528883934, 0.010673229582607746, 0.06868202239274979, -0.004062887281179428 ]

{ "pdf_file": "VELUXRRXN2I54VRZZSVQZO7HVHQDIVUP.pdf", "text": "Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 926 Filed 06/28/06 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 926 Filed 06/28/06 Page 2 of 2" }

[ -0.022183416411280632, -0.0208787452429533, -0.006516404449939728, -0.042630650103092194, 0.1369752287864685, 0.037711434066295624, -0.007862604223191738, 0.002597826300188899, -0.04669754207134247, -0.0037163570523262024, 0.034053586423397064, 0.01742573268711567, -0.06788720190525055, 0.019929353147745132, -0.016315080225467682, -0.0010074714664369822, 0.043881066143512726, 0.018703395500779152, -0.06085241585969925, 0.043466854840517044, 0.040781375020742416, 0.07769250124692917, -0.0136847123503685, 0.01646478846669197, -0.04369053989648819, -0.027650224044919014, -0.09268726408481598, -0.009075363166630268, -0.09726423770189285, 0.009498911909759045, -0.01807895489037037, -0.036537859588861465, 0.03447657823562622, -0.010131766088306904, 0.025734521448612213, -0.011910283006727695, 0.06066469848155975, -0.034941188991069794, 0.018033767119050026, 0.03744613006711006, -0.034565817564725876, -0.09977103769779205, -0.044330351054668427, 0.030099069699645042, -0.08872836083173752, -0.024468788877129555, 0.029253557324409485, -0.010480198077857494, 0.00951395370066166, -0.03127837926149368, -0.051327481865882874, 0.08257775008678436, -0.03299332782626152, -0.04848802834749222, 0.07345592230558395, -0.028379902243614197, -0.011838971637189388, -0.01269580703228712, -0.10540846735239029, -0.06897969543933868, -0.0158467348664999, -0.10250306129455566, -0.0009146776283159852, -0.004154423717409372, 0.07424280047416687, 0.018508004024624825, -0.06381083279848099, -0.02261902391910553, -0.04945405572652817, -0.01894432306289673, 0.0007082292577251792, -0.024897441267967224, -0.0110629852861166, -0.047894615679979324, -0.034587349742650986, 0.08437227457761765, 0.026909152045845985, 0.10836552828550339, 0.13848067820072174, -0.07660865038633347, 0.017541075125336647, -0.012519164942204952, 0.020386628806591034, -0.09193101525306702, 0.027722014114260674, 0.01757405884563923, -0.054824281483888626, -0.03305688500404358, 0.027177631855010986, 0.06169508770108223, 0.04759741947054863, -0.09112845361232758, 0.047925546765327454, 0.02442614734172821, 0.004744920413941145, 0.057592857629060745, 0.02006061188876629, -0.014054245315492153, 0.00009423367737326771, 0.028044745326042175, -0.009722256101667881, -0.01817496120929718, -0.05947975814342499, -0.09551622718572617, -0.021088464185595512, 0.031203260645270348, -0.08872392028570175, 0.03812447935342789, 0.0076976255513727665, 0.07990643382072449, -0.03907287120819092, 0.08382619172334671, -0.07594003528356552, 0.00724917184561491, 0.01389273814857006, 0.12308336794376373, 0.0200788713991642, -0.08280327171087265, -0.025654828175902367, -0.07923447340726852, 0.029581153765320778, 0.045997317880392075, -0.0076417443342506886, 0.03536895662546158, 0.11809695512056351, 0.05650661885738373, 0.012349726632237434, -2.731155972492484e-34, 0.00016917605535127223, -0.03935224562883377, 0.026166284456849098, -0.06329108774662018, 0.002112927148118615, 0.05335516110062599, -0.008003314957022667, -0.01805918477475643, 0.062231823801994324, 0.007611704524606466, -0.013770697638392448, 0.039915718138217926, -0.0026399085763841867, -0.018817687407135963, -0.015235540457069874, -0.09853003919124603, -0.05158337205648422, -0.000874743505846709, 0.053918831050395966, -0.003909159451723099, 0.022208349779248238, 0.03459098935127258, 0.006115691736340523, 0.08775339275598526, -0.010486640967428684, 0.010515346191823483, -0.026951557025313377, -0.05565909668803215, -0.028102932497859, 0.06533245742321014, -0.007796166930347681, -0.01549102459102869, 0.028186039999127388, -0.03697340935468674, -0.017539698630571365, -0.06027069315314293, -0.08764495700597763, -0.028138644993305206, -0.025320809334516525, -0.004919992759823799, 0.025569694116711617, 0.01718186028301716, 0.05822629854083061, 0.08323951065540314, -0.06559723615646362, -0.002131093991920352, 0.06353496015071869, 0.09370625764131546, -0.057244960218667984, -0.02807476930320263, 0.02183080092072487, -0.0015401196433231235, 0.06737107783555984, -0.1118842363357544, 0.039680350571870804, -0.0706108808517456, 0.02957540564239025, -0.0972316712141037, -0.021616166457533836, -0.02469218522310257, -0.005537644028663635, 0.15419502556324005, -0.01187318004667759, 0.02379106916487217, -0.07049452513456345, -0.04392218962311745, -0.05146320164203644, 0.007718406151980162, 0.017999980598688126, 0.046818364411592484, 0.06466230750083923, -0.0544259212911129, -0.006934243254363537, -0.02644762583076954, 0.0033424615394324064, -0.04445432499051094, 0.020081356167793274, 0.09301865100860596, 0.029921680688858032, -0.07611771672964096, 0.01761854998767376, 0.04587336257100105, -0.01900291070342064, -0.03921817988157272, -0.13900895416736603, 0.02443689852952957, -0.06597008556127548, 0.00008636251732241362, 0.061741575598716736, 0.012049213983118534, -0.002651180373504758, 0.022958070039749146, 0.004020465537905693, -0.03919706121087074, 0.027199525386095047, -2.883084117396953e-33, -0.0608799122273922, -0.011423207819461823, 0.0072296434082090855, 0.058366063982248306, -0.02509727142751217, -0.04411815106868744, 0.020363910123705864, -0.03251630440354347, 0.09335552155971527, -0.07945477217435837, -0.006926052737981081, 0.054353006184101105, -0.04364243522286415, 0.02787207067012787, 0.0254515390843153, -0.03105366788804531, -0.04634660854935646, -0.01287918258458376, 0.0017286082729697227, -0.08771608024835587, -0.009859449230134487, 0.04158956557512283, -0.003159536514431238, 0.11859168857336044, -0.05197474732995033, 0.027080658823251724, -0.07180099934339523, -0.0629677101969719, 0.05942094326019287, -0.08503596484661102, 0.005583242047578096, 0.014062146656215191, -0.015777256339788437, 0.054972752928733826, 0.0023055793717503548, -0.05020136386156082, 0.0388508066534996, -0.009686483070254326, -0.02825784869492054, -0.06282979995012283, 0.1353641152381897, -0.03868672624230385, -0.03816163167357445, 0.05534496158361435, -0.035274870693683624, 0.011608929373323917, -0.020854154601693153, -0.027020374312996864, -0.006074594799429178, 0.07295162230730057, 0.001222205231897533, 0.04423544555902481, 0.007434389088302851, -0.04274795949459076, -0.038523126393556595, 0.08753576874732971, 0.055157195776700974, -0.06942452490329742, 0.037136517465114594, 0.06290768086910248, 0.03975950926542282, 0.09500245749950409, -0.027499977499246597, 0.02835565246641636, 0.06222841516137123, -0.056115955114364624, -0.01773287169635296, -0.05442682281136513, 0.07589791715145111, -0.014496794901788235, -0.014511526562273502, -0.0694054663181305, -0.0301422867923975, 0.004663359839469194, 0.024300578981637955, 0.04514408856630325, -0.0036409166641533375, -0.026463882997632027, -0.10047412663698196, 0.06143272668123245, -0.014550479128956795, -0.07656572014093399, 0.020874619483947754, 0.0707976296544075, 0.06204334273934364, -0.017802469432353973, -0.04188406094908714, -0.04498741403222084, 0.034505005925893784, 0.11783793568611145, -0.11559661477804184, -0.06136607751250267, -0.03386921435594559, 0.028646839782595634, 0.013151821680366993, -5.2620471535647084e-8, 0.010132106952369213, -0.03772985562682152, -0.016563741490244865, 0.01537066139280796, -0.008127089589834213, -0.01789521612226963, -0.020656561478972435, -0.0008389835129491985, 0.040193893015384674, 0.09008929878473282, 0.07330331206321716, 0.1209319531917572, -0.0462639145553112, -0.0015136186266317964, -0.03084106184542179, -0.017944488674402237, -0.0005603712634183466, 0.006007124669849873, -0.03745557367801666, 0.03538477048277855, -0.044693365693092346, -0.0014265944482758641, -0.114321768283844, -0.03816468268632889, 0.05935230851173401, -0.050292521715164185, 0.03686033934354782, 0.14338430762290955, 0.06419374793767929, 0.03904308006167412, 0.0017268385272473097, 0.0298463124781847, -0.04563901573419571, 0.028621552512049675, -0.05763494223356247, -0.0890500545501709, -0.038002241402864456, -0.00616720924153924, 0.05470548942685127, -0.018260324373841286, -0.08911461383104324, 0.03368442505598068, -0.020532293245196342, 0.015184368938207626, 0.052644602954387665, -0.025966791436076164, -0.07804985344409943, 0.04127321019768715, 0.0100139444693923, 0.016393160447478294, -0.07939774543046951, 0.03510858863592148, 0.024825721979141235, 0.011035839095711708, 0.04111725091934204, -0.011377851478755474, 0.023589203134179115, -0.07072228938341141, 0.014579002745449543, -0.10124687105417252, 0.03196768835186958, -0.04728235676884651, 0.06957157701253891, 0.030523112043738365 ]

{ "pdf_file": "T7GYN5EOA7RVES22BVEIK24KNUZMNJDG.pdf", "text": "Rooney’s Livestock Subcommittee Hears from Florida Cattleman on State of Beef Industry\nWashington, D.C. – U.S. Rep. Tom Rooney (FL-16), Chairman of the House Agriculture\nSubcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry, today heard testimony from Jim Strickland, a\nlivestock producer and President of the Florida Cattlemen’s Association, during a hearing today\non the state of the beef industry.\n \n“Today’s hearing gave us a clearer picture of the economic situation and public policy\nchallenges that our livestock producers face,” Rooney said.  “Many federal regulations,\nregardless of how well-intentioned they might be, have unintended consequences that hurt our\nlivestock producers, and today’s hearing shed some light on those effects. \n \n“I particularly appreciate Jim Strickland, who is a livestock producer and President of the\nCattlemen’s Association in my home state of Florida, for coming to Washington to discuss the\nimpact of federal laws and regulation on his business.”\n \nIn his prepared testimony , Mr. Strickland discussed the impact of federal regulations like dust\nand numeric nutrient standards from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on livestock\nproducers.  He also urged Congress to enact pending trade agreements and permanently end\nthe death tax.\n \n \n###\n \n 1 / 1" }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "SFF6OU2N7INH3UGAKC4QLCTJU2VZK7WM.pdf", "text": " " }

[ 0.02931170165538788, -0.02369106560945511, 0.16686081886291504, -0.04052899405360222, 0.03425418585538864, 0.038080792874097824, 0.004520118702203035, -0.02290736697614193, -0.11729606240987778, 0.04301219806075096, 0.11612597107887268, 0.12055546790361404, -0.054952483624219894, -0.06826847791671753, 0.02011757902801037, 0.037496816366910934, 0.00983456615358591, 0.00774839473888278, -0.06395350396633148, -0.04928434267640114, 0.05957568809390068, 0.07878341525793076, -0.03027411550283432, 0.05217595770955086, -0.10117131471633911, 0.061895448714494705, -0.02559887059032917, -0.03352909907698631, -0.009453333914279938, 0.001232054317370057, -0.0612960085272789, -0.018949083983898163, -0.01653200387954712, -0.03414863720536232, 0.07797554135322571, -0.10707898437976837, 0.05771363526582718, 0.020968802273273468, 0.03895461559295654, -0.02976909652352333, 0.009447630494832993, -0.0950145572423935, -0.018082907423377037, -0.01625455729663372, 0.014824620448052883, 0.056658800691366196, -0.019668906927108765, -0.11182666569948196, -0.05024952441453934, 0.04792657867074013, 0.047202154994010925, 0.001679750857874751, 0.056284885853528976, 0.0170411616563797, 0.03252305090427399, -0.07624171674251556, -0.030511099845170975, 0.07935991138219833, 0.013940403237938881, -0.0050969235599040985, -0.01335585955530405, 0.00601879321038723, -0.09349645674228668, 0.003900440176948905, -0.04109925404191017, 0.0323525033891201, -0.008589891716837883, -0.10165228694677353, 0.07927966117858887, 0.019725928083062172, -0.025229789316654205, -0.035833023488521576, -0.01020676176995039, -0.010642853565514088, -0.012495632283389568, 0.011204570531845093, -0.004913249984383583, 0.12252989411354065, 0.000877517624758184, -0.12776604294776917, 0.0016484782099723816, -0.054216962307691574, 0.07267574220895767, -0.028404157608747482, -0.005045294761657715, -0.03337264806032181, -0.07149103283882141, -0.03355879709124565, 0.09147651493549347, 0.02301078289747238, 0.02861485816538334, 0.0012690889416262507, 0.09407977014780045, 0.009892867878079414, -0.08160760253667831, -0.0686769038438797, -0.046893320977687836, -0.023988090455532074, 0.06964242458343506, 0.03909090533852577, -0.00035535948700271547, 0.07316987961530685, -0.09242139011621475, 0.015033869072794914, 0.03125261142849922, -0.044400930404663086, 0.010520013980567455, 0.007022148463875055, 0.00698107061907649, -0.03438464552164078, 0.019595591351389885, -0.02231779135763645, 0.037896301597356796, -0.06835372745990753, 0.06008553504943848, -0.028118249028921127, 0.010448154993355274, 0.05457806959748268, 0.05207544192671776, -0.007755282800644636, 0.03003406524658203, 0.030764881521463394, -0.03641775995492935, 0.04002036526799202, 0.018947046250104904, 0.10112510621547699, -0.028447510674595833, -2.488705946367068e-33, -0.06751292198896408, 0.004983744118362665, -0.009111867286264896, 0.02179517224431038, 0.03887536749243736, -0.1086961105465889, -0.02899879403412342, -0.0841873288154602, 0.01338089071214199, -0.011919433251023293, 0.040792644023895264, -0.0575852245092392, -0.04300101101398468, -0.08572079241275787, 0.06649767607450485, -0.00046762567944824696, -0.00830444972962141, 0.03642610087990761, 0.11083754897117615, 0.050040800124406815, -0.008370998315513134, -0.05258025974035263, -0.0020650813821703196, -0.04759613424539566, -0.016815342009067535, 0.017914583906531334, -0.009843726642429829, 0.011941610835492611, 0.0029428291600197554, 0.023872191086411476, 0.04655279964208603, -0.06813524663448334, 0.07490453124046326, 0.042772069573402405, -0.04385388270020485, -0.052335597574710846, 0.007721138186752796, -0.05475901812314987, -0.005888134706765413, -0.04908367246389389, -0.039495084434747696, 0.0033508152700960636, -0.034992966800928116, -0.10895618796348572, 0.11781743168830872, -0.027690060436725616, -0.03726837784051895, -0.009014526382088661, 0.15737228095531464, -0.04558033123612404, 0.08650492131710052, -0.001712483586743474, -0.0008730575209483504, -0.004311265889555216, -0.04810735583305359, -0.01721600815653801, -0.020925691351294518, 0.030075661838054657, -0.004758685827255249, 0.009349942207336426, 0.10578442364931107, 0.05837235227227211, 0.04712088778614998, -0.030307339504361153, -0.08240010589361191, -0.017335275188088417, 0.013749090023338795, -0.01688757911324501, -0.01406227145344019, -0.05370936915278435, -0.028811579570174217, 0.028441328555345535, -0.07113353908061981, -0.03589772805571556, -0.010317336767911911, 0.0014288604725152254, -0.04032360762357712, -0.01836581528186798, 0.06359802931547165, 0.02320103347301483, 0.004221448674798012, -0.020173391327261925, 0.016595739871263504, -0.02571854554116726, 0.13300387561321259, -0.04319041222333908, 0.025188205763697624, 0.04522405564785004, 0.03544998914003372, 0.014455175958573818, -0.06779385358095169, -0.041783399879932404, -0.0561612993478775, 0.10947304219007492, 0.010756205767393112, -9.047112374222078e-34, 0.0000861016524140723, 0.026114879176020622, -0.052570998668670654, -0.016705691814422607, -0.07115153223276138, -0.007166294381022453, -0.0648074671626091, -0.027693556621670723, 0.013625524938106537, -0.05509915202856064, 0.07842118293046951, -0.037851229310035706, 0.001788050401955843, 0.06403913348913193, -0.03649377077817917, 0.003599113319069147, -0.025496089830994606, 0.009480586275458336, -0.022603187710046768, 0.017071953043341637, -0.05286087840795517, -0.05540090054273605, 0.0688830316066742, 0.0639800876379013, -0.0784379243850708, -0.024582894518971443, 0.027856627479195595, 0.02109643630683422, 0.09876061975955963, 0.01772907003760338, -0.014846096746623516, 0.007388761732727289, -0.04792853817343712, 0.1336306780576706, 0.01285294909030199, -0.13090115785598755, 0.0319545641541481, -0.03442428633570671, -0.007181848865002394, -0.04016896337270737, 0.04934076964855194, 0.0659979060292244, -0.00013578817015513778, 0.030437417328357697, -0.04489777982234955, 0.06093251332640648, 0.04915552958846092, 0.04630429670214653, -0.056827522814273834, -0.04173830524086952, -0.026585832238197327, -0.04224337264895439, 0.0992918387055397, 0.01868036761879921, -0.07378655672073364, 0.08879643678665161, 0.09517522156238556, -0.006879202090203762, -0.006518580485135317, 0.000512941216584295, -0.024535059928894043, 0.037686415016651154, -0.06516002118587494, -0.006399146281182766, 0.07516728341579437, 0.06926722079515457, 0.09731308370828629, 0.035321734845638275, 0.03781866654753685, -0.07181372493505478, 0.023038052022457123, -0.09237094968557358, -0.17342273890972137, 0.015222156420350075, 0.015505398623645306, 0.07999393343925476, 0.03511696308851242, -0.009896935895085335, -0.0754658579826355, -0.000323224114254117, 0.0022131565492600203, -0.012140041217207909, -0.06675369292497635, -0.018158284947276115, 0.010580591857433319, -0.0024074064567685127, -0.07560642808675766, -0.004666673485189676, 0.04099278897047043, 0.0029189791530370712, -0.029975073412060738, -0.017766837030649185, -0.04439933970570564, 0.023490294814109802, -0.07792304456233978, -4.323633717717712e-8, 0.009125313721597195, 0.0179404616355896, -0.05513569712638855, -0.009950429201126099, 0.07188808172941208, -0.012760988436639309, -0.05181555822491646, 0.023980915546417236, -0.019750472158193588, -0.02605046145617962, 0.006044942885637283, 0.043387554585933685, -0.05449826642870903, -0.00596662750467658, -0.001056094653904438, -0.04862212762236595, -0.077415332198143, 0.04820607975125313, 0.010723804123699665, 0.021608132869005203, -0.05913451313972473, -0.05016205832362175, 0.023999197408556938, -0.01912647858262062, -0.05814165621995926, 0.04860732704401016, -0.01818149723112583, 0.07790480554103851, 0.047876033931970596, -0.027414722368121147, 0.035084567964076996, 0.0703088566660881, 0.025058668106794357, 0.008140912279486656, 0.009750401601195335, -0.018974902108311653, -0.015632955357432365, -0.009323401376605034, 0.034621164202690125, 0.03757782280445099, 0.00047482873196713626, -0.0010773532558232546, 0.05561758205294609, 0.0085276048630476, 0.04012071713805199, 0.06374858319759369, 0.018522407859563828, 0.02949425019323826, 0.014564869925379753, -0.026162393391132355, -0.03536220267415047, -0.023603014647960663, 0.06283017992973328, 0.018161462619900703, -0.053455062210559845, -0.0421137660741806, 0.013964541256427765, -0.0556199736893177, -0.03959602862596512, -0.03886903077363968, 0.08244536817073822, 0.07121491432189941, -0.009342444129288197, 0.000427652063081041 ]

{ "pdf_file": "CZXLJIPYAEZEX6CTNJ7JZTSBXA44TTVT.pdf", "text": " \nPage 1 of 1 13A.340 Repealed, 1990. \nCatchline at repeal: Notification of administrative regulations filed prior to July 14, \n1984, which are to remain in effect -- Procedure -- Repeal of administrative \nregulations for which no notice is received by July 1, 1985. \nHistory: Repealed 1990 Ky. Acts ch. 516, sec. 32, effective July 13, 1990. -- Created \n1984 Ky. Acts ch. 417, sec. 34, effective April 13, 1984. " }

[ -0.050091132521629333, 0.02038932405412197, 0.03443608805537224, -0.04195950925350189, 0.0004126094572711736, 0.13770925998687744, -0.04387015849351883, 0.025622336193919182, -0.08343641459941864, 0.02942654862999916, 0.005540565587580204, 0.0755477249622345, 0.007587490137666464, -0.05341389402747154, 0.020512692630290985, 0.03456658497452736, -0.006706081330776215, -0.04603353142738342, -0.03833216428756714, 0.03191515803337097, 0.04438376426696777, 0.02490108832716942, -0.08685420453548431, 0.008109817281365395, 0.018988704308867455, 0.008651314303278923, -0.020822694525122643, 0.01925123669207096, -0.014519586227834225, 0.07163005322217941, -0.023214593529701233, 0.055489543825387955, 0.04055169224739075, 0.025104105472564697, 0.04789507016539574, 0.031191254034638405, 0.07094666361808777, 0.005600746721029282, 0.02728997729718685, 0.007164929527789354, -0.02330397441983223, -0.05692509934306145, -0.03081286884844303, 0.012379436753690243, -0.00024983767070807517, -0.008494602516293526, -0.02725783921778202, -0.04164760559797287, -0.08959405869245529, 0.017680607736110687, -0.07977847009897232, -0.02767794579267502, 0.049161430448293686, 0.04489276558160782, -0.007928449660539627, -0.04022306203842163, 0.03067612834274769, -0.04014730453491211, -0.02825377881526947, 0.04714129492640495, -0.05567022040486336, -0.058717235922813416, -0.10514222830533981, 0.036705516278743744, 0.067379891872406, -0.04099910333752632, -0.07382288575172424, -0.016117729246616364, -0.05332549661397934, -0.014813900925219059, -0.07784111797809601, -0.038542769849300385, -0.08380051702260971, 0.0054499125108122826, -0.013971738517284393, -0.043402571231126785, 0.03615320473909378, 0.05945057421922684, 0.09744692593812943, -0.12981176376342773, 0.04861588403582573, 0.0008908311137929559, -0.0360875204205513, 0.04568108171224594, 0.004355392884463072, -0.022394761443138123, 0.006089193746447563, -0.049051783978939056, 0.046875711530447006, -0.021403245627880096, -0.004253762774169445, 0.007146875839680433, 0.047955308109521866, -0.043305594474077225, 0.03629082068800926, 0.009680463001132011, -0.026884494349360466, 0.006578034721314907, -0.009583443403244019, 0.054122574627399445, -0.006148624699562788, -0.025983648374676704, -0.004444636404514313, -0.06031671538949013, -0.13560721278190613, -0.07530593872070312, 0.036912500858306885, 0.07461626082658768, -0.03623499348759651, 0.01129715982824564, 0.04096938669681549, 0.017387257888913155, 0.00381925399415195, -0.061075158417224884, 0.004666509572416544, -0.01558234915137291, -0.03701427951455116, 0.055222347378730774, 0.09532006829977036, -0.012899075634777546, 0.04395906254649162, -0.018439190462231636, -0.05217645689845085, 0.0565577894449234, -0.04636635258793831, -0.1207868680357933, -0.020582810044288635, -1.077222288409575e-32, -0.018077576532959938, -0.054008692502975464, -0.027593621984124184, 0.07324427366256714, 0.0745035707950592, -0.0020097859669476748, 0.01556077878922224, -0.010609082877635956, 0.022191613912582397, -0.0030389619059860706, -0.06255701184272766, 0.016286278143525124, -0.021593721583485603, 0.11114565283060074, -0.02608560398221016, -0.016620095819234848, -0.017836254090070724, 0.08235946297645569, -0.10306653380393982, 0.019460516050457954, 0.06763333082199097, 0.01763315126299858, 0.008742966689169407, 0.03676958382129669, 0.03571730852127075, 0.0010649370960891247, -0.048532549291849136, -6.824758429502253e-7, -0.06084734573960304, 0.007164344657212496, 0.05721399933099747, 0.09718363732099533, 0.02548307180404663, -0.011600259691476822, 0.07861486077308655, -0.016844287514686584, 0.019832013174891472, -0.01899520307779312, -0.005117382854223251, 0.023153364658355713, -0.02528695948421955, 0.023701373487710953, 0.11084763705730438, 0.01641942746937275, 0.02888493798673153, 0.04814377799630165, 0.012017113156616688, -0.0015678590862080455, 0.04330816492438316, 0.10146230459213257, -0.04783032089471817, 0.0786399319767952, -0.03747657313942909, -0.07625048607587814, -0.059113793075084686, -0.052875787019729614, -0.0466962568461895, 0.02498403750360012, 0.011258790269494057, -0.018439294770359993, 0.04023885354399681, 0.053916942328214645, -0.010874518193304539, -0.022338351234793663, -0.08412165194749832, -0.0025899293832480907, -0.04058123379945755, 0.002907903166487813, 0.13642805814743042, -0.0216878242790699, -0.051513683050870895, 0.004667115397751331, 0.007077590562403202, 0.032012857496738434, 0.03229711204767227, -0.008565012365579605, 0.0022339720744639635, 0.04047629237174988, 0.002128190826624632, -0.08465542644262314, -0.04045576602220535, -0.032528337091207504, 0.003670856123790145, -0.057979319244623184, -0.014135537669062614, 0.022684114053845406, 0.13736650347709656, -0.0557514913380146, -0.005465600173920393, 0.005825801752507687, -0.035098712891340256, -0.029035117477178574, -0.06665147840976715, 0.0835680142045021, 0.009652942419052124, 1.954091299284084e-33, -0.01595487631857395, -0.06149084120988846, 0.013506957329809666, -0.10294928401708603, -0.002285073045641184, 0.002822267124429345, -0.026138441637158394, -0.10228052735328674, 0.049603234976530075, 0.017818165943026543, 0.021266311407089233, -0.02746305800974369, -0.04487813636660576, 0.046261873096227646, -0.046196456998586655, 0.01531333290040493, 0.020209385082125664, -0.018937118351459503, -0.04667827486991882, 0.008537192828953266, 0.09179883450269699, 0.0869644284248352, -0.025254538282752037, 0.07320518791675568, 0.025547463446855545, -0.029620304703712463, -0.006846741773188114, 0.008328665979206562, -0.0022732638753950596, 0.013841940090060234, -0.05168493092060089, -0.055995892733335495, -0.05927794426679611, 0.036966919898986816, -0.11362281441688538, -0.057498954236507416, 0.060631703585386276, -0.08152257651090622, 0.004484209232032299, -0.003820947837084532, 0.11377603560686111, -0.05500940605998039, -0.04448389261960983, 0.11607503145933151, -0.08027437329292297, -0.05982248857617378, 0.012489470653235912, -0.09253182262182236, -0.06251522898674011, 0.0027503857854753733, -0.008799975737929344, 0.06214158609509468, -0.04617851600050926, 0.013426858931779861, 0.03002088889479637, -0.059327248483896255, 0.05606907606124878, -0.04059616103768349, -0.17493721842765808, -0.041827697306871414, 0.04524552822113037, 0.0991857573390007, -0.07379022240638733, -0.00016548304120078683, 0.15725308656692505, -0.10712094604969025, -0.04264838621020317, -0.0985981747508049, 0.027831176295876503, -0.01041347160935402, -0.04319888353347778, -0.06718600541353226, -0.03275914862751961, -0.062443699687719345, -0.027053410187363625, -0.028672941029071808, -0.01077995728701353, -0.04508525878190994, -0.13535304367542267, 0.08196818083524704, -0.02555282786488533, -0.10627386718988419, 0.04646103456616402, 0.029297485947608948, -0.031232155859470367, 0.08862427622079849, 0.05353493243455887, 0.009299257770180702, -0.04375530034303665, 0.05929126963019371, -0.07673335820436478, 0.006462641526013613, -0.007596758659929037, 0.023954764008522034, -0.01840118318796158, -5.451024165381568e-8, 0.08367297053337097, -0.038117777556180954, -0.040366411209106445, -0.00034042762126773596, -0.046518635004758835, -0.020373549312353134, -0.07623748481273651, -0.01120048202574253, -0.08445217460393906, 0.03169092535972595, -0.018154263496398926, 0.013484364375472069, -0.027953848242759705, -0.03243350237607956, 0.030598746612668037, -0.03504830598831177, -0.006270899437367916, 0.042588308453559875, -0.08732155710458755, -0.03623388335108757, -0.013019862584769726, 0.0897538810968399, -0.033824045211076736, 0.001091929036192596, -0.003635409288108349, 0.0447397381067276, -0.039847709238529205, 0.09187903255224228, 0.014197222888469696, 0.023379355669021606, 0.0044092475436627865, -0.006982807535678148, -0.004142642021179199, -0.0934915691614151, -0.03313656896352768, 0.006971451453864574, 0.051465924829244614, 0.007979418151080608, 0.07179486006498337, -0.0173967182636261, 0.031899940222501755, -0.04100937396287918, 0.018397441133856773, 0.08329428732395172, 0.06826815009117126, -0.039947498589754105, -0.08567575365304947, -0.021810920909047127, 0.06923267990350723, -0.033090848475694656, -0.0012044203467667103, 0.009701458737254143, -0.0347331240773201, 0.01932777650654316, 0.01841350831091404, -0.03338157385587692, -0.05372432619333267, 0.039313141256570816, 0.00639759935438633, 0.017020585015416145, 0.010368714109063148, 0.015154923312366009, -0.018551470711827278, -0.013058190234005451 ]

{ "pdf_file": "G55L6N2GWXAO25ORSIBERRGSISMUNVKC.pdf", "text": " \n \n1330 Broadway , Suite 1426 \nOakland , CA 94612 \nTel: (510) 763 -1499 \nFax: (510) 763 -1599 \nwww .spra.com                                                                           SOCIA L POLICY RESEA RCH \nASS OCIATE S \n \nPrepared for: \nOffice of Performance and \nTechnology \nEmployment and Training \nAdministration \nUS Department of Labor \n200 Constitution Ave. NW \nWashington DC 20210 \nDOL Order Number: \nDOLF091A20934 \n \nProject No. 1382 PY 2009 WIASRD Data Book \nVermont \nJanuary 6, 2011 \n \n \n \nPrepared by: \n Social Policy Research Associates \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nVermont \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates \n iCONTENTS \nGuide To The Reader .................................................................................................... 1 \nPart I: Summary Compar isons Across Program s ..................................................... 5 \nTable I-1: Trends in the Number of Exiters, by Program of Participation ............................................ 7 \nTable I-2: Number of Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by State and Program \nof Participation .............................................................................................................. ........ 8 \nTable I-3: Number of Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Selected Characteristics .............. 10 \nTable I-4 Trends Over Time in the Number of Adult Exiters, by State ............................................. 12 Table I-5 Trends Over Time in the Number of Dislocated Worker Exiters from Local and \nStatewide Programs, by State.............................................................................................. 14 \nTable I-6 Trends Over Time in the Number of Exiters from NEG Projects, by State ........................ 16 \nTable I-7 Trends Over Time in the Number of Youth Exiters, by State ............................................ 18 \nPart II: Adul t Exiters ................................................................................................... 21 \nTable II-1: Characteristics of Adult Exiters, Trends Over Time ........................................................... 22 \nTable II-2: Number of Adult Exiters, by Characteristics, Trends Over Time ....................................... 24 Table II-3: Characteristics of Adult Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Age ........................................................................................................................ ......... 26 \nTable II-4: Characteristics of Adult Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Ethnicity and Race ......................................................................................................... 28 \nTable II-5: Characteristics of Adult Exiters fro m April 2009 to March 2010, by Employment \nat Participation, Gende r, and Disability .............................................................................. 30 \nTable II-6: Characteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Veteran \nStatus ........................................................................................................................ ........... 32 \nTable II-7: Characteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 who Received \nIntensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed ............................................ 34 \nTable II-8: Characteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 who Received \nIntensive or Training Servi ces, by UI Status ...................................................................... 36 \nTable II-9: Characteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 who Received \nIntensive or Training Services, by Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance ............ 38 \nTable II-10 Characteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 who Received \nIntensive or Training Services, by Selected Characteristics ............................................... 40 \nTable II-11: Characteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Major \nService Ca tegories ............................................................................................................ .. 42 \nTable II-12: Number of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, with Specific \nCharacteristics by Major Service Categories ...................................................................... 44 Contents \nSocial Policy Research Associates iiTable II-13: Characteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Type of Training ........................................................................................................... . 46 \nTable II-14: Services Received by Adu lt Exiters, Trends Over Time .................................................... 48 \nTable II-15: Number of Adult Exiters, by Se rvices Received, Trends Over Time ................................. 50 \nTable II-16: Services Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Age ................... 52 \nTable II-17: Services Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Ethnicity and Race ......................................................................................................... 54 \nTable II-18: Services Received by Adult Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, by \nEmployment at Participation, Gender and Disability Status ............................................... 56 \nTable II-19: Services Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Veteran Status ............................................................................................................. ... 58 \nTable II-20: Services Received by Adult Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010 who \nReceived Intensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed ............................ 60 \nTable II-21: Services Received by Adult Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010 who \nReceived Intensive or Training Services, by UI Status ....................................................... 62 \nTable II-22: Services Received by Adult Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010 who \nReceived Intensive or Training Services, by Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance .................................................................................................................... ....... 64 \nTable II-23: Services Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 who \nReceived Intensive or Training Servi ces, by Selcted Ch aracteristics ................................. 66 \nTable II-24: Services Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by State ................. 68 \nTable II-25: Outcomes of Adult Ex iters, Trends Over Time .................................................................. 70 \nTable II-26: Number of Adult Exiters Attaining Outcomes, Trends Over Time ................................... 72 Table II-27: Outcomes of Adult Exiters, by Age ................................................................................ .... 74 \nTable II-28: Outcomes of Adult Exite rs, by Ethnicity and Race ............................................................ 76 \nTable II-29: Outcomes of Adult Exiters, by Em ployment at Participation, Gender and \nDisability Status ............................................................................................................. ..... 78 \nTable II-30: Outcomes of Adult Ex iters, by Vetera n Status ................................................................... 8 0 \nTable II-31: Outcomes of Adult Exiters who Received Intensive or Training Services, \nby Highest Grade Completed .............................................................................................. 82 \nTable II-32: Outcomes of Adult Exiters who Received Intensive or Training Services, \nby UI Status .................................................................................................................. ...... 84 \nTable II-33: Outcomes of Adult Exiters from who Received Intensive or Training Services, \nby Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance .............................................................. 86 \nTable II-34: Outcomes of Adult Exiters who Received Intensive or Training Services, \nby Selected Characteristics ................................................................................................. 8 8 \nTable II-35: Outcomes of Adult Exiters , by Major Service Categories .................................................. 90 \nTable II-36: Outcomes of Adult Exite rs, by Type of Training ............................................................... 92 \nTable II-37: Performance Outcomes of A dult Exiters, by Characteristics .............................................. 94 Contents \nSocial Policy Research Associates iiiTable II-38: Performance Outcomes of A dult Exiters, by Serv ices Receive d ........................................ 96 \nTable II-39: Performance Outcomes of Adult Exiters, by State ............................................................. 98 \nPart III: Dislocated Worker Ex iters .......................................................................... 101 \nTable III-1: Characteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Characteristics, Trends Over \nTime .......................................................................................................................... ........ 102 \nTable III-2: Number of Dislocated Worker Exiters, Trends Over Time .............................................. 104 Table III-3: Characteristics of Dislocated Work er Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Funding Source ............................................................................................................ 106 \nTable III-4: Characteristics of Dislocated Workers Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nby Type of NEG Project ................................................................................................... 108 \nTable III-5: Characteristics of Dislocated Work er Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Age ........................................................................................................................ ....... 110 \nTable III-6: Characteristics of Dislocated Work er Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Ethnicity and Race ....................................................................................................... 1 12 \nTable III-7: Characteristics of Dislocated Work er Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation, Gender and Disability .................................................. 114 \nTable III-8: Characteristics of Dislocated Work er Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by \nVeteran Status ................................................................................................................ ... 116 \nTable III-9: Characteristics of Dislocated Wo rker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed .................. 118 \nTable III-10: Characteristics of Dislocated Wo rker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Traini ng Services, by UI Status ............................................. 120 \nTable III-11: Characteristics of Dislocated Wo rker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Serv ices, by Selected Characteristics ..................... 122 \nTable III-12: Characteristics of Dislocated Wo rker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Major Service Categories ............................................................................................. 124 \nTable III-13: Number of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, with \nSpecific Characteristics, by Major Service Categories ..................................................... 126 \nTable III-14: Characteristics of Dislocated Wo rker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Type of Training .......................................................................................................... 128 \nTable III-15: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters, Trends Over Time ............................. 130 \nTable III-16: Number of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Services Received, \nTrends Over Time ............................................................................................................. 132 \nTable III-17: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nby Funding Source ............................................................................................................ 134 \nTable III-18: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Type of NEG Project ................................................................................................... 136 \nTable III-19: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Age ........................................................................................................................ ....... 138 Contents \nSocial Policy Research Associates ivTable III-20: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Ethnicity and Race ....................................................................................................... 1 40 \nTable III-21: Services Received by Dislocat ed Worker Exiters from AApril 2009 to March \n2010, by Employment at Particip ation, Gender and Disability ........................................ 142 \nTable III-22: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Veteran Status ............................................................................................................. . 144 \nTable III-23: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed ................. 146 \nTable III-24: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Traini ng Services, by UI Status ............................................. 148 \nTable III-25: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Serv ices, by Selected Characteristics ..................... 150 \nTable III-26: Services Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby State ...................................................................................................................... ....... 152 \nTable III-27: Outcomes of Dislocated Work er Exiters, Trends Over Time ........................................... 154 \nTable III-28: Number of Dislocated Worker Exiters Attaining Outcomes, Trends Over Time ............ 156 \nTable III-29: Outcomes of Dislocated Wo rker Exiter, by Funding Source ............................................ 158 \nTable III-30: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Type of NEG Project ................................. 160 \nTable III-31: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Age ............................................................. 162 \nTable III-32: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Ethnicity and Race ..................................... 164 \nTable III-33: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Gender and Disability ................................ 166 Table III-34: Outcomes of Dislocated Work er Exiters, by Veteran Status ............................................ 168 \nTable III-35: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters who Received Intensive or Training \nServices, by Highest Grade Comple ted ............................................................................ 170 \nTable III-36: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters who Received Intensive or Training \nServices, by UI Status ....................................................................................................... 172 \nTable III-37: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters who Received Intensive or Training \nServices, by Selected Characteristics ................................................................................ 174 \nTable III-38: Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Major Service Categories ........................... 176 \nTable III-39: Performance Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Type of Training ................... 178 \nTable III-40: Performance Outcomes of Dislocat ed Worker Exiters, by Characteristics ....................... 180 \nTable III-41: Performance Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Services Received ................. 182 Table III-42: Performance Outcomes of Dislo cated Worker Exiters, by State Excludes \nIndividuals Served Only by NEG Programs ..................................................................... 184 Contents \nSocial Policy Research Associates vPart IV: Youth Exiters ............................................................................................... 187 \nTable IV-1: Characteristics of Youth Exiters, Trends Over Time ........................................................ 188 \nTable IV-2: Number of Youth Exiters, by Characteristics, Trends Over Time .................................... 190 \nTable IV-3: Characteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Age ...................... 192 \nTable IV-4: Characteristics of Youth Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Ethnicity and Race ....................................................................................................... 1 94 \nTable IV-5: Characteristics of Youth Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Gender and Disability .................................................................................................. 196 \nTable IV-6: Characteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation and Basic Skills Deficiency .......................................... 198 \nTable IV-7: Characteristics of Youth Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby School Status at Participation ...................................................................................... 200 \nTable IV-8 Characteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, Out-of-School \nand In-School Youth at Participation ................................................................................ 202 \nTable IV-9: Characteristics of Youth Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Barriers to Employment ............................................................................................... 204 \nTable IV-10: Characteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance ............................................................ 206 \nTable IV-11: Characteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Selected Characteristics ............................................................................................... 208 \nTable IV-12: Characteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Youth Activities ........................................................................................................... 210 \nTable IV-13: Services Received by Yo uth Exiters, Trends Over Time .................................................. 212 \nTable IV-14: Number of Youth Exiters, by Services Received, Trends Over Time .............................. 213 \nTable IV-15: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Age ................ 214 \nTable IV-16: Services Received by Yout h Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \n by Ethnicity and Race ...................................................................................................... 2 15 \nTable IV-17: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Gender and Disability .................................................................................................. 216 \nTable IV-18: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation and Basic Skills Deficiency .......................................... 217 \nTable IV-19: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby School Status at Participation ...................................................................................... 218 \nTable IV-20 Services Received by Youth Ex iters fromApril 2009 to March 2010, Out-of-\nSchool and In-School Youth at Participation .................................................................... 219 \nTable IV-21: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Barriers to Employment ............................................................................................... 220 \nTable IV-22: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance ............................................................ 221 Contents \nSocial Policy Research Associates viTable IV-23: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Selected Characteristics ............................................................................................... 222 \nTable IV-24: Services Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby State ...................................................................................................................... ....... 223 \nTable IV-25: Outcomes of Youth Ex iters, Trends Over Time ............................................................... 226 \nTable IV-26: Number of Youth Exiters Atta ining Outcomes, Trends Over Time ................................ 228 \nTable IV-27: Outcomes of Youth Exiters, by Age ............................................................................... . 230 \nTable IV-28: Outcomes of Youth Ex iters, by Ethnic ity and Race ........................................................ 232 \nTable IV-29: Outcomes of Youth Ex iters, by Gender and Disability .................................................... 234 \nTable IV-30: Outcomes of Youth Exiters, by Employment at Participation and \nBasic Skills De ficiency ..................................................................................................... 2 36 \nTable IV-31: Outcomes of Youth Exiters, by School Status at Participation ........................................ 238 \nTable IV-32: Outcomes of Youth Exiters, Out-of-S chool and In-School Youth at Participation ......... 240 \nTable IV-33: Outcomes of Youth Exiters, by Barriers to Employment ................................................ 242 \nTable IV-34: Outcomes of Youth Exiters, by Low Income and Receipt of \nPublic Assistance ............................................................................................................. . 244 \nTable IV-35: Outcomes of Youth Exiter s, by Selected Characteristics ................................................. 246 \nTable IV-36: Outcomes of Youth Exiters, by Youth Activities ............................................................ 248 \nTable IV-37: Youth Common Measu res, by Charact eristics .................................................................. 250 \nTable IV-38: Youth Common Measur es, by Services Received ............................................................ 252 \nTable IV-39: Youth Comm on Measures, by State.................................................................................. 252 \nTable IV-40: Performance Outcomes of Younge r Youth Exiters, by Characteristics ............................ 256 \nTable IV-41: Performance Outcomes of Younger Youth Exiters, by Services Received ...................... 258 \nTable IV-42: Performance Outcomes of Younger Youth Exiters, by State ............................................ 260 \nTable IV-43: Performance Outcomes of Olde r Youth Exiters, by Characteristics ................................. 262 \nTable IV-44: Performance Outcomes of Ol der Youth, by Serv ices Received ....................................... 264 \nTable IV-45: Performance Outcomes of Older Youth Exiters, by State ................................................ 266 \nAppendix A: Not es to Tabl es .................................................................................. 269 \nAppendix B: Definitions ........................................................................................... 283 \nDefinitions of Characteristics................................................................................................. ................... 285 \nDefinitions of Services ....................................................................................................... ....................... 291 \nDefinitions of Outcomes ....................................................................................................... .................... 296 \nSocial Policy Research Associates 1GUIDE TO THE READER \nThe Data Book provides detailed informati on on the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) \nprograms, including information about who is served, what services are provided, and the \noutcomes attained by participants. The Data Book is based on the Workforce Investment \nStandard Record Data (WIASRD), which is an individual-level data se t containing information \nreported annually by states to the Employment and Training Administration.1 This version of the \nData Book uses data provided by states in th eir Program Year (PY) 2009, Quarter 4 submissions, \nwhich contain information about individuals who participated in WIA at any time from January \n1, 2008 to June 30, 2010. It thus in cludes individuals who finished participation (“exited”) from \nJanuary 1, 2008 to March 31, 2010 and individuals w ho had started participation before July 1, \n2010, but had not finished participation by June 30, 2010. All tables in the Data Bookhave \nbeen computed using the final version of th e PY 2009, Quarter 4 WIASRD data, which includes \na variety of data corrections and adjustments. Some tables also use data from previous \nsubmissions. \nThe State version of the Data B ook contains tables based on a singl e state’s data, as identified in \nthe header for each table. Some tables compare the state with the nation or with other states. \nEspecially for small states, some data are base d on only a small number of exiters, as shown in \neither the first row or first column of each table. The reader should use caution when \ninterpreting results based on only a few exiters. For example, pe rcentages based on 400 exiters \nhave a 95% confidence interval of 5 percentage points. Percen tages based on 100 exiters have \na 95% confidence interval of 10 percentage points. \nGeneral notes that apply to most or all of the ta bles in the Data Book appear in this section. \nMore detailed Notes to Tables are provided in Appendix A, which follows the last table. These \nNotes to Tables present important information that is cri tical to the proper interpretation of the \ndata in the tables. Appendix B provides de finitions of the data items presented. \nOverview of Tables \nThe Data Book contains four primary groups of tables: \n Section I contains tables for WIA Title 1B as a whole, including the programs for \nadults, dislocated workers, and youth. It also includes National Emergency Grant \n \n1 Detailed information about this data set, including the spec ifications that states were to follow when reporting, can \nbe found in Training and Employment Guidance Letter 14-00, Change 1. Employment and Training \nAdministration, November 19, 2002. http://www .doleta.gov/usworkforce/documents/tegl/#14-00ch1. Guide to the Reader \nSocial Policy Research Associates 2(NEG) projects. This section also include s tables showing trends over time in the \nnumber of exiters by state. \n Section II contains tables fo r the adult program, which serves individuals aged 18 and \nhigher. All adults are eligible for services under the adult program. However, states \nare to give priority to low-income adu lts in the event that funds are limited. \n Section III contains tables for the disl ocated worker program and for NEGs. \nDislocated workers are generally experien ced workers who have been laid off (or \nreceived notice of termination) due to a pe rmanent closure or substantial layoff. \n Section IV contains tables for the youth pr ogram, which serves individuals aged 14 to \n21. With some exceptions, eligibility for youth program services is limited to low-\nincome youth. \nSections II, III and IV all follow a similar structure. First, there are tables that show the \ncharacteristics of WIA exiters. These are followe d by tables that show the services received by \nexiters. The final group of tables sh ows the outcomes received by exiters. \nFor adults and dislocated workers, two pr imary groups of characteristics are shown: \ncharacteristics available for all ex iters and characteristics availabl e only for exiters who received \nintensive or training services. When interpreting th e information in the tables it is important to \nremember that these latter characteristics were not collected for individuals who received only \ncore services to limit the data collection burde n on individuals who received only limited WIA \nservices. Thus, percentages for these characteri stics are based only on individuals who received \nintensive or training services. \nThe adult and dislocated worker tables do not include individuals who received only self- and \ninformational services. \nFor dislocated workers, the tables combine in formation on individuals served by the formula-\nfunded Title IB dislocated worker program a nd by National Emergency Grants to provide a \npicture of all services provided to dislocated workers by WIA Title 1. \nTables show characteristics, se rvices received, or outcomes for WIA participants for the most \nrecent year for which data on the particular characteristic, service, or outcome is available. The \nonly exception to this is for the outcomes trends over time tables, for which the more recent time \nperiods do not contain data for an entire year’s worth of exiters for some outcomes. The \nexceptions are described in the no tes at the bottom of these tabl es, as well as in Appendix A. \nNone of the tables includes information on some other WIA Title 1 programs, including the \nIndian and Native American Program, the Na tional Farmworker Jobs Program, veterans' \nworkforce investment programs, and Job Corps. These other programs are not reported in the \nWIASRD data used for this Data Book, but in their own separate reporting systems. Guide to the Reader\nSocial Policy Research Associates 3Summary of Table Notation \nIn interpreting the data in the ta bles, the reader should note that: \n Data that is not available is shown as blank. For example, in Table II-10 the \npercentages for the characteristics of ex iters who received in tensive or training \nservices are not shown in the colu mn titled “Core Services Only.” \n “0.0” is used to denote percen tages that are less than 0.05%. \nUnits of Measurement \nThe numbers appearing in the table are eith er raw counts (e.g., the number of exiters), \npercentages (e.g., the percentage who are female), or averages (e.g., average quarterly earnings \nin the quarter after exit). \n Raw counts represent the number of exiters identified by the combination of the row \nand column headings. Individuals with mi ssing data on a row or column heading are \nnot included in the count. \n Percentages generally represent the percentage identified by the row heading among \nall of those identified by the column headi ng—that is they are column percentages. \nSome tables, however, present row percentages , the percentage identified by the \ncolumn heading among those identified by th e row heading. These are specified in \nNotes to Tables —one example is Table II-24 that shows the percentage receiving \ndifferent levels of service by state. Tables that show co lumn percentages always show \nthe number of exiters in the first row so that the reader can see th e size of the universe \non which the percentage is based. Tables th at show row percentages always show the \nnumber of exiters in the first column. \n Individuals with missing data on either the row or column heading are excluded \nwhen calculating percentages. In addition, all outcome data exclude individuals who \nwere institutionalized (e.g., in a hospital or prison) or de ceased at exit or had a \nmedical or health condition that precluded them from continuing WIA services or \nentering employment. However, these indi viduals are included in the number of \nexiters shown in the outcome tables. \n Averages are calculated for selected items that are measured on a continuous scale \n(e.g., quarterly earnings in the quarter afte r exit) and are computed after excluding \nmissing data. \nQuality of the Underlying Data \nThe WIASRD reporting system was first effective for PY 2000. Thus, the PY 2009 data used for \nthis Data Book represents data from the tenth ye ar of reporting. As with any new data system, \nstates varied in how long it took to implement fully the different elements of the reporting \nsystem. Thus, the quality and completeness of th e data varies among states, especially in early \nyears. For example, the WIA performance meas ures can be calculated from the WIASRD data \nand compared to data separately reported by states to ETA. This comparison showed that Guide to the Reader \nSocial Policy Research Associates 4calculations of the entered employ ment rate and retention rate fr om the WIASRD generally were \nclose to the data reported by most states. Thus, there is substantial consistency in the data on \npostprogram employment. However, there were larger discrepancies for earnings change, \nyounger youth retention, and younger youth diploma atta inment. These discrepancies have been \nreduced over time. When there are discrepancies, the states generally reported higher outcomes \nthan we calculated from the WIASRD. It is not known whether the WIASRD data or the state’s \ncalculations are correct when there are discrepancies. \nSome new and revised reporting requirements were introduced with the PY 2005 WIASRD. \nThus, this data book includes some data reported for the fifth time. These data may be \nincomplete. New characteristics data items included offender for adults, other eligible person as \na category of veteran status, and ever in fost er care for youth. In addition, Food Stamps was \nadded to other public assistance. New services data include core self-service and informational \nactivities, workforce information services and pr evocational services for adults and dislocated \nworkers, disaster relief for disl ocated workers, and enrolled in education for youth. In addition, \nnew categories for the type of training were repor ted for adults and dislocated workers. These \nnew fields may be underreported, more so in the ear lier time periods covered by the data. Please \nsee the notes to tables for more details on some of the changes. \nThe data set used to prepare th e Data Book underwent an extensive data review. As a result of \nthis data review, some data for a few states wa s recoded or set to missing when the data were \nclearly incorrect. Data that was set to missing ar e excluded from the calculations of percentages \nand averages in this Data Book, as discussed abov e. Consequently, state results reported in the \nData Book may differ from states’ own computations from their data. \nChanges From the PY 2008 Data Book \nThe PY 2009 State Data Book inco rporates a significant change from the PY 2008 version. In \nserveral adult and dislocated worker tables s howing performance outcomes, the column for the \nemployment and credential rate has been replaced by a column for the credential attainment rate. \nThe latter shows the percentage of adult or dislocated worker trainees who attain a credential, but \nis not one of the official WIA performance measures. \nConfidentiality \nTo preserve the confidentiality of WIA participants, data have been suppressed when a column \nor row is based on fewer than 9 exiters. The en tire row or column will be blank. However, on \nthe second page of two page tables “0” will s how for the number of exiters. The actual number \nof exiters may be anywhere from zero to eight. \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates 5 \n \nPart I \nSummary Comparisons Across Programs All Programs \nSocial Policy Research Associates 7Table I-1 \nTrends in the Number of Exiters, by Program of Participation \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–3/31/10 \nTotal exiters, all \nprograms 1,181,248 1,437,112 1,660,547 572 560 655 \nLocal programs 1,146,086 1,406,009 1,628,333 572 560 655 \nStatewide programs 42,084 41,754 46,840 0 0 0 \nNEG programs 10,858 13,948 19,612 \nTotal adults 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nLocal programs 821,424 1,016,848 1,151,839 154 162 248 \nStatewide programs 18,860 16,655 17,169 \nTotal dislocated \nworkers 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146 \nLocal programs 228,635 340,197 510,455 108 129 146 \nStatewide programs 11,876 15,337 20,370 \nNEG programs 10,858 13,948 19,612 \nDisaster Relief 3,563 4,387 5,137 \nOther 7,295 9,561 14,475 \nTotal Youth 120,226 110,770 119,969 310 269 261 \nLocal programs 112,360 105,395 115,131 310 269 261 \nStatewide programs 11,757 10,200 9,952 0 0 0 \nTotal younger \nyouth 86,992 80,292 84,248 262 218 202 \nLocal programs 80,815 75,564 80,323 262 218 202 \nStatewide \nprograms 9,086 8,751 8,063 \nTotal older youth 33,234 30,478 35,721 48 51 59 \nLocal programs 31,545 29,831 34,808 48 51 59 \nStatewide \nprograms 2,671 1,449 1,889 \n \n All Programs \nSocial Policy Research Associates \n 8Table I-2 \nNumber of Exiters from April 2009 to March 200 9 , by State and Program of Participation \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Total, All \nPrograms \nAdult Dislocated \nWorker Younger \nYouth \nOlder Youth \nNation 1,660,547 1,163,229 531,617 84,248 35,721 \nAlabama 3,878 2,066 1,087 372 407 \nAlaska 1,300 427 335 430 131 Arizona 6,558 2,956 2,287 911 468 Arkansas 2,937 1,185 792 822 160 California 125,600 78,164 38,932 8,693 4,547 \nColorado 4,121 2,152 671 865 489 \nConnecticut 2,770 1,098 1,048 295 350 Delaware 974 516 334 105 27 District of Columbia 949 704 104 128 46 Florida 28,043 19,825 3,575 3,276 1,694 Georgia 7,926 2,930 2,889 1,451 735 \nHawaii 1,017 189 580 240 23 \nIdaho 1,872 556 876 307 169 Illinois 19,835 6,590 7,598 3,561 2,172 Indiana 135,816 133,161 25,712 2,103 1,750 Iowa 10,343 7,240 4,627 339 206 \nKansas 14,185 12,086 2,088 452 214 \nKentucky 6,939 3,502 1,970 1,119 492 Louisiana 138,641 129,855 10,718 798 596 Maine 1,620 413 918 236 122 Maryland 3,199 1,589 1,402 565 115 Massachusetts 8,060 2,194 4,051 1,446 476 \nMichigan 19,987 7,995 5,685 4,270 2,037 \nMinnesota 6,729 1,517 3,571 1,263 410 Mississippi 34,647 16,600 14,183 2,729 1,136 Missouri 7,949 3,219 3,298 1,049 658 Montana 1,099 335 559 201 66 \nNebraska 1,345 551 452 133 211 \nNevada 2,895 1,620 1,096 219 56 New Hampshire 1,736 546 852 263 77 New Jersey 6,755 2,148 2,957 1,540 295 New Mexico 5,393 4,076 319 755 287 \nNew York 551,116 340,364 216,175 5,242 1,976 \nNorth Carolina 9,033 3,430 4,077 1,079 496 North Dakota 1,281 749 234 228 120 Ohio 19,693 8,980 6,523 3,283 1,449 All Programs \nSocial Policy Research Associates 9 Total, All \nPrograms \nAdult Dislocated \nWorker Younger \nYouth \nOlder Youth \nOklahoma 59,222 57,572 18,069 436 217 \nOregon 168,803 151,148 95,929 1,028 422 Pennsylvania 16,426 4,523 8,151 2,907 1,039 Puerto Rico 21,110 3,181 1,752 13,894 2,439 Rhode Island 2,806 729 1,514 510 91 \nSouth Carolina 22,709 12,027 7,811 1,900 1,412 \nSouth Dakota 1,410 709 499 158 89 Tennessee 14,739 6,513 3,447 3,815 1,419 \nTexas 36,788 20,752 10,930 4,144 2,122 Utah 96,567 96,301 772 423 268 \nVermont 655 248 146 202 59 \nVirgin Islands 671 365 161 101 70 Virginia 6,020 1,837 2,718 1,223 341 Washington 7,633 2,793 3,042 1,481 574 West Virginia 2,043 713 940 322 93 Wisconsin 6,028 1,902 3,117 775 306 \nWyoming 676 388 44 161 97 \n \n All Programs \nSocial Policy Research Associates \n 10Table I-3 \nNumber of Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Total, All \nPrograms \nAdult Dislocated \nWorker Younger \nYouth \nOlder Youth \nNumber of Exiters 655 248 146 202 59 \nAge categories \n14 to 17 145 145 \n18 to 21 135 18 1 57 59 22 to 29 79 68 11 30 to 44 135 91 44 45 to 54 100 44 56 55 and over 61 27 34 Not reported \nGender \nFemale 298 128 51 92 27 \nMale 357 120 95 110 32 Not reported \nDisability status \nWithout disabilities 377 169 127 63 18 \nWith disabilities 278 79 19 139 41 \nNot reported \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 9 2 1 4 2 \nNot Hispanic 646 246 145 198 57 American Indian or \n Alaskan Native (only) 6 3 2 1 \n Asian (only) 6 1 3 2 \n Black or African \n American (only) 21 9 2 8 2 \n Hawaiian or other \n Pacific Islander (only) 1 1 \n White (only) 612 233 138 187 54 \n More than one race \nNot reported \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 39 15 24 \nNonveteran 414 233 122 59 Not reported 202 202 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 46 31 8 5 2 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 609 217 138 197 57 \nNot reported \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates 11This page intentionally blank \n \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates \n 12Table I-4 \nTrends Over Time in the Number of Adult Exiters, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nNation 252,065 624,648 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 \nAlabama 3,282 3,623 3,881 1,776 2,066 \nAlaska 533 284 549 408 427 \nArizona 3,449 4,456 4,710 3,367 2,956 Arkansas 1,085 888 954 875 1,185 California 37,082 25,637 20,208 77,708 78,164 Colorado 2,629 2,951 3,076 2,438 2,152 \nConnecticut 1,004 717 935 1,079 1,098 \nDelaware 536 538 368 439 516 District of Columbia 604 487 645 551 704 Florida 17,415 17,054 16,259 18,195 19,825 Georgia 3,758 2,568 2,891 2,654 2,930 Hawaii 444 460 375 202 189 \nIdaho 397 537 419 446 556 \nIllinois 5,788 5,192 5,685 3,927 6,590 Indiana 3,044 2,862 25,967 126,484 133,161 Iowa 637 644 489 574 7,240 Kansas 837 1,353 2,027 2,171 12,086 \nKentucky 2,094 3,499 3,042 3,714 3,502 \nLouisiana 4,627 59,323 103,366 121,899 129,855 Maine 537 427 359 345 413 Maryland 1,761 1,519 1,505 1,683 1,589 Massachusetts 1,811 1, 787 1,767 1,872 2,194 \nMichigan 7,057 6,994 7,261 6,149 7,995 \nMinnesota 1,450 1,710 1,312 1,245 1,517 \nMississippi 35,168 53,976 40,485 22,680 16,600 Missouri 3,906 3,981 3,746 3,149 3,219 Montana 321 300 262 283 335 Nebraska 482 435 453 435 551 \nNevada 1,756 934 1,053 1,194 1,620 \nNew Hampshire 424 412 436 394 546 New Jersey 3,321 3,343 3,617 2,239 2,148 New Mexico 1,294 1,344 1,133 2,074 4,076 New York 31,990 304,083 381,423 326,504 340,364 \nNorth Carolina 5,398 4,770 3,021 2,524 3,430 \nNorth Dakota 475 491 534 684 749 Ohio 8,243 9,332 10,302 8,067 8,980 Oklahoma 1,815 36,311 50,444 53,885 57,572 \nSocial Policy Research Associates 13 PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nOregon 2,829 2,490 2,542 71,099 151,148 \nPennsylvania 5,453 3,713 4,864 4,709 4,523 Puerto Rico 3,674 4,540 5,794 5,416 3,181 Rhode Island 435 675 439 758 729 South Carolina 3,059 4,687 7,354 9,132 12,027 South Dakota 646 623 996 722 709 \nTennessee 5,674 6,395 6,630 7,887 6,513 \nTexas 20,428 22,867 28,209 21,411 20,752 Utah 2,009 1,686 67,519 97,697 96,301 Vermont 142 232 154 162 248 Virgin Islands 396 418 184 221 365 \nVirginia 2,514 2,811 1,823 1,602 1,837 \nWashington 3,970 4,236 3,371 2,687 2,793 West Virginia 1,280 1,467 1,278 676 713 Wisconsin 2,761 2,292 1,722 1,542 1,902 Wyoming 341 294 293 248 388 \nSocial Policy Research Associates \n 14Table I-5 \nTrends Over Time in the Number of Dislocated Worker Exiters from Local and Statewide Programs, \nby State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nNation 155,526 230,838 234,378 347,156 519,082 \nAlabama 1,672 1,460 1,036 871 1,087 \nAlaska 562 215 345 289 335 Arizona 1,248 1,766 1,855 1,735 2,287 Arkansas 244 203 267 368 541 California 12,130 11,668 10,498 19,400 38,256 \nColorado 1,304 1,128 834 662 671 \nConnecticut 809 715 723 793 975 Delaware 242 195 147 148 326 District of Columbia 142 111 56 38 103 Florida 4,653 3,362 3,215 2,185 3,167 Georgia 2,429 1,760 1,963 2,049 2,584 \nHawaii 352 349 243 397 327 \nIdaho 636 541 380 421 589 Illinois 7,647 7,115 6,698 4,672 7,437 Indiana 2,148 1,847 3,040 14,852 25,632 Iowa 812 788 996 1,093 3,595 \nKansas 499 453 454 1,015 1,878 \nKentucky 1,502 1,854 1,681 1,512 1,789 Louisiana 1,025 1,808 1,902 4,730 9,021 Maine 773 617 555 458 706 Maryland 1,166 1,192 1,246 1,150 1,402 Massachusetts 4,624 3, 698 3,594 3,156 3,890 \nMichigan 5,760 5,968 5,477 4,326 5,642 \nMinnesota 2,419 2,469 2,711 1,711 3,571 Mississippi 22,610 41,682 23,359 15,210 10,969 Missouri 2,709 2,823 2,648 2,363 3,213 Montana 350 299 185 327 556 \nNebraska 422 302 226 268 452 \nNevada 722 660 798 617 1,096 New Hampshire 641 613 512 466 781 New Jersey 4,049 3,990 4,259 2,812 2,954 New Mexico 331 314 188 263 319 \nNew York 17,260 82,666 108,071 170,212 216,110 \nNorth Carolina 4,917 3,866 2,867 2,206 3,499 North Dakota 198 160 126 144 234 Ohio 3,696 3,941 4,329 4,879 6,323 \nSocial Policy Research Associates 15 PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nOklahoma 906 731 555 3,785 18,069 \nOregon 2,552 2,371 2,448 45,404 95,708 Pennsylvania 7,605 5,654 5,952 5,330 7,795 Puerto Rico 2,013 1,691 1,974 1,948 1,752 Rhode Island 505 438 382 483 1,510 South Carolina 2,744 3,495 4,727 5,171 7,811 \nSouth Dakota 283 279 207 186 499 \nTennessee 2,508 2,599 2,701 2,792 3,447 Texas 9,520 8,186 7,915 6,383 9,435 Utah 697 430 355 339 772 Vermont 55 125 108 129 146 \nVirgin Islands 19 148 171 90 161 \nVirginia 2,708 2,120 2,389 1,806 2,661 Washington 4,993 4,552 2,987 2,476 2,914 West Virginia 1,195 1,418 1,090 777 927 Wisconsin 4,471 3,978 2,926 2,253 3,114 Wyoming 49 25 7 6 44 \nSocial Policy Research Associates \n 16Table I-6 \nTrends Over Time in the Number of Exiters from NEG Projects, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nNation 93,549 45,873 10,858 13,948 19,612 \nAlabama 283 \nAlaska 312 60 31 3 3 \nArizona Arkansas 323 472 88 135 261 California 3,072 1,597 755 1,167 1,279 Colorado 1 \nConnecticut 187 190 116 87 85 \nDelaware 48 13 31 District of Columbia 1 28 Florida 3,792 407 188 510 508 Georgia 271 986 262 578 346 Hawaii 19 95 175 424 394 \nIdaho 130 97 88 172 340 \nIllinois 104 32 6 412 893 Indiana 56 19 16 378 502 Iowa 111 195 367 1,142 1,437 Kansas 126 210 212 \nKentucky 278 135 210 92 203 \nLouisiana 4,183 9,310 1,335 1,471 1,954 Maine 594 501 292 198 456 Maryland 168 34 7 2 Massachusetts 1,520 715 850 308 559 Michigan 233 47 24 163 472 \nMinnesota 227 37 13 99 378 \nMississippi 3,367 5,275 1,870 2,449 3,221 Missouri 1,249 811 349 576 952 Montana 145 119 48 64 51 Nebraska 99 15 4 \nNevada \nNew Hampshire 111 131 83 71 New Jersey 33 2 8 New Mexico New York 43 2 184 \nNorth Carolina 1,325 782 114 251 696 \nNorth Dakota Ohio 306 108 95 177 436 Oklahoma 338 510 \nSocial Policy Research Associates 17 PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nOregon 740 728 345 275 688 \nPennsylvania 842 387 251 313 598 Puerto Rico Rhode Island 220 8 27 18 10 South Carolina 406 91 13 1 3 South Dakota 352 162 63 4 \nTennessee 217 232 33 10 2 \nTexas 65,424 20,973 2,186 1,847 1,862 Utah 15 2 4 Vermont 19 2 Virgin Islands \nVirginia 194 2 76 129 \nWashington 655 92 35 77 135 West Virginia 244 64 74 2 14 Wisconsin 1,292 568 265 172 211 Wyoming \n \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates \n 18Table I-7 \nTrends Over Time in the Number of Youth Exiters, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nNation 146,246 114,286 120,226 110,770 119,969 \nAlabama 1,965 1,394 1,102 915 779 Alaska 500 545 594 529 561 \nArizona 2,011 1,236 1,295 1,180 1,379 \nArkansas 1,080 773 895 801 982 California 17,312 13,959 13,716 11,925 13,240 Colorado 1,697 1,357 1,196 1,292 1,354 Connecticut 902 452 639 504 645 \nDelaware 416 186 181 133 132 \nDistrict of Columbia 50 186 156 381 174 Florida 7,975 3,948 4,132 4,124 4,970 Georgia 3,830 2,093 2,465 2,167 2,186 Hawaii 533 427 257 278 263 Idaho 440 541 451 479 476 \nIllinois 4,790 3,759 4,059 2,810 5,733 \nIndiana 2,041 1,965 3,289 3,678 3,853 Iowa 539 583 510 576 545 Kansas 682 582 962 615 666 Kentucky 1,976 1,439 1,707 1,594 1,611 \nLouisiana 3,062 1,428 1,447 1,201 1,394 \nMaine 562 367 368 337 358 Maryland 1,188 958 1,021 797 680 Massachusetts 2,109 1, 569 1,459 1,826 1,922 \nMichigan 7,799 5,868 5,362 6,187 6,307 Minnesota 1,767 1,735 1,648 1,458 1,673 \nMississippi 2,759 3,099 3,868 3,798 3,865 \nMissouri 2,389 1,935 1,830 2,060 1,707 Montana 253 178 189 232 267 Nebraska 308 350 275 314 344 Nevada 940 411 274 639 275 \nNew Hampshire 334 338 299 319 340 \nNew Jersey 4,638 3,149 2,757 2,771 1,835 New Mexico 2,075 873 1,072 1,063 1,042 New York 9,901 10,654 5,625 6,939 7,218 North Carolina 3,438 2,726 2,326 1,514 1,575 \nNorth Dakota 387 325 369 265 348 \nOhio 5,170 4,527 4,713 3,815 4,732 Oklahoma 1,043 928 676 631 653 Oregon 2,017 1,684 1,769 1,372 1,450 \nSocial Policy Research Associates 19 PY 2005 PY 2006 PY 2007 PY 2008 4/1/09–3/31/10 \nPennsylvania 4,280 3,352 3,692 3,248 3,946 \nPuerto Rico 13,151 12,447 17,776 16,198 16,333 Rhode Island 197 163 222 287 601 South Carolina 1,933 2,074 2,427 2,630 3,312 South Dakota 650 421 556 278 247 Tennessee 3,654 2,371 3,769 3,613 5,234 \nTexas 12,838 7,880 10,489 7,054 6,266 \nUtah 547 477 521 557 691 Vermont 271 280 310 269 261 Virgin Islands 96 33 28 56 171 Virginia 1,855 1,715 1,326 1,372 1,564 \nWashington 3,110 2,406 2,047 1,898 2,055 \nWest Virginia 831 660 644 463 415 Wisconsin 1,564 1,217 1,242 1,153 1,081 Wyoming 391 263 224 175 258 \nSocial Policy Research Associates 21 \n \n \n \nPart II \nAdult Exiters Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 22Table II-1 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nStatewide programs 18,860 16,655 17,169 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 821,424 1,016,848 1,151,839 154 162 248 \nCharacteristics of All \nExiters \nAge categories \n18 to 21 9.8 10.2 10.2 7.8 8.6 7.3 \n22 to 29 25.2 25.0 24.6 32.5 22.2 27.4 30 to 44 35.0 34.2 33.6 35.1 46.9 36.7 45 to 54 19.2 19.6 20.0 17.5 17.9 17.7 \n55 and over 10.7 10.9 11.6 7.1 4.3 10.9 \nGender \nFemale 47.6 45.9 45.1 42.9 50.0 51.6 \nMale 52.4 54.1 54.9 57.1 50.0 48.4 \nIndividual with a \ndisability 4.6 4.5 4.2 22.7 24.7 31.9 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 12.7 13.8 13.5 1.3 2.5 0.8 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native \n(only) 1.6 1.6 1.7 0.6 1.2 1.2 \nAsian (only) 2.1 2.4 2.3 2.6 0.0 0.4 \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) 26.7 23.4 21.4 2.6 2.5 3.6 \nHawaiian or other \nPacific Islander \n(only) 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 55.0 56.7 59.0 92.2 93.8 94.0 \nMore than one race 1.7 1.6 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 7.6 7.2 7.6 9.7 6.8 6.0 \nDisabled veteran 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.6 1.2 0.0 \nCampaign veteran 1.7 1.5 1.7 5.3 1.9 3.2 Recently separated \nveteran 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 1.2 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 23 Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nEmployed at \nparticipation \nEmployed 17.7 17.1 15.6 18.8 13.0 12.5 \nNot employed or \nreceived layoff notice 82.3 82.9 84.4 81.2 87.0 87.5 \nAverage preprogram \nquarterly earnings $6,719 $6,913 $6,887 $3,887 $4,028 $4,676 \nNone 19.3 20.9 22.2 33.8 27.2 31.7 \n$1 to $2,499 19.2 19.0 18.8 26.0 23.5 22.8 $2,500 to $4,999 21.2 19.8 19.1 20.1 27.2 19.4 $5,000 to $7,499 15.7 15.4 14.7 14.9 14.2 13.9 $7,500 to $9,999 9.5 9.7 9.5 2.6 5.6 6.7 \n$10,000 or more 15.1 15.2 15.6 2.6 2.5 5.6 \nCharacteristics of \nExiters who Received \nIntensive or Training \nServices \nLimited English-\nlanguage proficiency 3.9 2.7 2.2 2.0 3.1 3.3 \nSingle parent 18.1 13.5 12.0 24.8 33.1 31.8 \nUI status \nClaimant 20.0 27.2 31.3 3.3 9.4 6.6 \nClaimant referred \nby WPRS 3.7 8.1 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 2.8 2.3 2.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 \nLow income 45.1 40.3 42.0 98.7 95.6 96.3 \nPublic assistance \nrecipient 18.9 17.0 18.9 21.6 21.9 21.5 \nTANF recipient 4.5 3.3 3.2 17.0 19.4 19.8 \nOther public assist. 17.8 16.4 18.4 9.8 5.0 4.1 \nHomeless 1.9 1.4 1.6 0.7 1.9 3.3 \nOffender 8.5 6.5 6.7 16.3 17.5 19.8 \nHighest grade \ncompleted (avg.) 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.6 12.5 12.6 \n8th or less 2.6 2.1 2.1 1.3 0.6 0.4 \nSome high school 12.0 12.1 12.7 9.2 11.9 6.2 \nHigh school graduate 41.9 40.9 39.0 49.7 50.0 50.4 \nHigh school equiv. 8.5 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.8 13.2 Some postsecondary 26.0 25.4 26.0 22.2 19.4 19.0 College graduate (4-\nyear) 9.0 10.0 11.2 9.2 9.4 10.7 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 24Table II-2 \nNumber of Adult Exiters, by Characteristics, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nStatewide programs 18,860 16,655 17,169 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 821,424 1,016,848 1,151,839 154 162 248 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \nAge categories \n18 to 21 82,534 105,511 118,892 12 14 18 \n22 to 29 211,444 257,987 285,657 50 36 68 30 to 44 293,678 352,594 390,552 54 76 91 45 to 54 160,652 201,921 232,620 27 29 44 55 and over 89,760 112,254 135,492 11 7 27 \nGender \nFemale 398,420 472,294 524,414 66 81 128 \nMale 439,247 557,142 637,435 88 81 120 \nIndividual with a disability 36,754 44,653 48,103 35 40 79 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 101,741 136,665 151,182 2 4 2 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 12,464 16,180 18,557 1 2 3 \nAsian (only) 16,577 23,670 25,361 4 0 1 \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) 213,343 231,481 239,507 4 4 9 \nHawaiian or other \nPacific Islander (only) 2,390 3,879 4,547 1 0 0 \nWhite (only) 440,154 560,401 661,557 142 152 233 \nMore than one race 13,684 16,208 19,707 0 0 0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 63,981 73,812 87,956 15 11 15 Disabled veteran 8,647 9,752 11,866 1 2 0 Campaign veteran 14,632 15,577 19,182 8 3 8 Recently separated veteran 9,381 9,539 10,814 0 2 0 Other eligible person 901 1,672 1,912 0 0 0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 25 Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 148,007 176,384 182,036 29 21 31 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 690,121 853,868 981,166 125 141 217 \nAverage preprogram \nquarterly earnings \nNone 161,305 214,497 186,532 52 44 57 \n$1 to $2,499 160,025 194,974 157,349 40 38 41 \n$2,500 to $4,999 176,821 203,978 160,533 31 44 35 \n$5,000 to $7,499 130,988 158,592 123,711 23 23 25 $7,500 to $9,999 79,417 99,871 79,466 4 9 12 $10,000 or more 126,232 156,660 131,268 4 4 10 \nCharacteristics of Exiters \nwho Received Intensive or \nTraining Services \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 9,291 9,395 9,266 3 5 8 \nSingle parent 41,271 46,403 50,033 38 53 77 \nUI status \nClaimant 48,209 96,248 133,737 5 15 16 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 8,853 28,634 36,360 0 0 0 \nExhaustee 6,782 8,182 9,615 0 2 0 \nLow income 108,177 142,154 179,247 151 153 233 \nPublic assistance recipient 45,580 60,281 80,468 33 35 52 \nTANF recipient 10,618 11,554 13,483 26 31 48 Other public assistance 42,790 58,088 78,160 15 8 10 \nHomeless 4,412 4,914 6,950 1 3 8 \nOffender 20,022 22,711 28,635 25 28 48 \nHighest grade completed \n8\nth or less 6,139 7,405 8,695 2 1 1 \nSome high school 28,735 41,811 52,203 14 19 15 \nHigh school graduate 100,086 141,458 161,016 76 80 122 \nHigh school equivalency 20,204 32,910 37,064 13 14 32 Some postsecondary 62,128 87,653 107,371 34 31 46 College graduate (4-year) 21,486 34,480 46,260 14 15 26 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 26Table II-3 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n 18 to 21 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 18 68 91 44 27 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 18 68 91 44 27 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \n22 to 29 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30 to 44 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 \n45 to 54 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 \n55 and over 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 \nGender \nFemale 38.9 48.5 59.3 43.2 55.6 \nMale 61.1 51.5 40.7 56.8 44.4 \nIndividual with a disability 38.9 27.9 30.8 36.4 33.3 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.0 1.5 1.1 0.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 5.6 1.5 0.0 0.0 3.7 \nAsian (only) 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) 5.6 8.8 1.1 2.3 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 88.9 86.8 97.8 97.7 96.3 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 0.0 0.0 3.3 18.2 14.8 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.3 14.8 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 27 Age at Participation \n 18 to 21 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 18 68 91 44 27 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 16.7 10.3 17.6 6.8 7.4 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 83.3 89.7 82.4 93.2 92.6 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $2,704 $3,337 $4,224 $5,721 $10,104 \nNone 25.0 33.3 30.0 33.3 35.3 \n$1 to $2,499 33.3 35.4 21.4 9.1 11.8 \n$2,500 to $4,999 33.3 16.7 21.4 18.2 11.8 $5,000 to $7,499 8.3 8.3 17.1 24.2 0.0 $7,500 to $9,999 0.0 4.2 7.1 9.1 11.8 $10,000 or more 0.0 2.1 2.9 6.1 29.4 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 0.0 7.7 2.2 2.3 0.0 \nSingle parent 11.1 41.5 43.3 16.3 7.7 \nUI status \nClaimant 11.1 9.2 5.6 7.0 0.0 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 94.4 98.5 94.4 95.3 100.0 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.7 33.8 26.7 7.0 0.0 \nTANF recipient 16.7 30.8 24.4 7.0 0.0 Other public assistance 0.0 7.7 5.6 0.0 0.0 \nHomeless 11.1 7.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 \nOffender 22.2 20.0 27.8 9.3 7.7 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.2 12.5 12.6 12.6 13.3 \n8\nth or less 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSome high school 5.6 3.1 5.6 16.3 0.0 \nHigh school graduate 55.6 66.2 46.7 34.9 46.2 \nHigh school equivalency 22.2 4.6 18.9 14.0 7.7 Some postsecondary 16.7 15.4 17.8 23.3 26.9 College graduate (4-year) 0.0 9.2 11.1 11.6 19.2 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 28Table II-4 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Ethnicity and Race \n((Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 246 9 233 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 Local programs 246 9 233 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 7.3 11.1 6.9 \n22 to 29 27.2 66.7 25.3 30 to 44 36.6 11.1 38.2 \n45 to 54 17.9 11.1 18.5 \n55 and over 11.0 0.0 11.2 \nGender \nFemale 51.2 33.3 51.5 \nMale 48.8 66.7 48.5 \nIndividual with a disability 32.1 11.1 33.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.2 0.0 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) 3.7 100.0 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.7 0.0 100.0 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 6.1 0.0 6.4 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 3.3 0.0 3.4 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 29 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 0 246 9 233 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 12.6 22.2 12.4 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 87.4 77.8 87.6 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $4,736 $2,690 $4,861 \nNone 32.0 37.5 31.1 \n$1 to $2,499 21.9 25.0 21.6 \n$2,500 to $4,999 19.7 37.5 19.2 $5,000 to $7,499 14.0 0.0 15.0 $7,500 to $9,999 6.7 0.0 7.2 $10,000 or more 5.6 0.0 6.0 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 2.9 22.2 1.8 \nSingle parent 31.3 11.1 32.6 \nUI status \nClaimant 6.7 22.2 6.2 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.3 100.0 96.0 \nPublic assistance recipient 20.8 11.1 21.6 \nTANF recipient 19.2 11.1 19.8 Other public assistance 4.2 0.0 4.4 \nHomeless 3.3 0.0 3.5 \nOffender 20.0 33.3 18.5 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.6 13.2 12.6 \n8\nth or less 0.4 0.0 0.4 \nSome high school 6.3 0.0 6.6 \nHigh school graduate 50.8 66.7 50.7 \nHigh school equivalency 13.3 0.0 13.7 Some postsecondary 18.8 11.1 18.5 College graduate (4-year) 10.4 22.2 10.1 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 30Table II-5 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation, Gender, and Disability \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Employed at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters 31 217 120 128 79 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 31 217 120 128 79 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 9.7 6.9 9.2 5.5 8.9 \n22 to 29 22.6 28.1 29.2 25.8 24.1 \n30 to 44 51.6 34.6 30.8 42.2 35.4 \n45 to 54 9.7 18.9 20.8 14.8 20.3 55 and over 6.5 11.5 10.0 11.7 11.4 \nGender \nFemale 51.6 51.6 0.0 100.0 41.8 \nMale 48.4 48.4 100.0 0.0 58.2 \nIndividual with a disability 38.7 30.9 38.3 25.8 100.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.6 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.3 1.3 \nAsian (only) 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American (only) 6.5 3.2 5.0 2.3 1.3 Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 93.5 94.0 94.2 93.8 97.5 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 3.2 6.5 10.8 1.6 7.6 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 3.2 3.2 5.9 0.8 3.8 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 31 Employed at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters 31 217 120 128 79 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 100.0 0.0 12.5 12.5 15.2 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 0.0 100.0 87.5 87.5 84.8 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $3,215 $4,879 $5,919 $3,370 $4,956 \nNone 34.8 31.2 30.0 33.3 43.6 \n$1 to $2,499 26.1 22.3 12.2 33.3 21.8 \n$2,500 to $4,999 30.4 17.8 18.9 20.0 9.1 $5,000 to $7,499 8.7 14.6 18.9 8.9 10.9 $7,500 to $9,999 0.0 7.6 12.2 1.1 7.3 $10,000 or more 0.0 6.4 7.8 3.3 7.3 \n \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \nLimited English-language proficiency 3.2 3.3 5.1 1.6 1.3 \nSingle parent 38.7 30.8 12.0 50.4 23.4 \nUI status \nClaimant 12.9 5.7 8.5 4.8 3.9 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 90.3 97.2 94.0 98.4 94.8 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.1 22.3 12.0 30.4 20.8 \nTANF recipient 12.9 20.9 12.0 27.2 18.2 Other public assistance 6.5 3.8 1.7 6.4 5.2 \nHomeless 3.2 3.3 2.6 4.0 5.2 \nOffender 9.7 21.3 18.8 20.8 18.2 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.0 12.6 12.5 12.8 12.5 \n8\nth or less 0.0 0.5 0.9 0.0 1.3 \nSome high school 0.0 7.1 8.5 4.0 5.2 \nHigh school graduate 54.8 49.8 57.3 44.0 46.8 \nHigh school equivalency 9.7 13.7 9.4 16.8 20.8 Some postsecondary 16.1 19.4 12.8 24.8 15.6 College graduate (4-year) 19.4 9.5 11.1 10.4 10.4 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 32Table II-6 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \n by Veteran Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Eligible \nVeteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 248 15 \nStatewide programs 0 0 Local programs 248 15 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 7.3 0.0 \n22 to 29 27.4 0.0 30 to 44 36.7 20.0 \n45 to 54 17.7 53.3 \n55 and over 10.9 26.7 \nGender \nFemale 51.6 13.3 \nMale 48.4 86.7 \nIndividual with a disability 31.9 40.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.8 0.0 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 1.2 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.4 0.0 \nBlack or African American (only) 3.6 0.0 Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.0 100.0 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 6.0 100.0 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 3.2 57.1 Recently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 33 \nAll Exiters Eligible \nVeteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 248 15 0 0 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 12.5 6.7 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 87.5 93.3 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $4,676 $6,597 \nNone 31.7 33.3 \n$1 to $2,499 22.8 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 19.4 22.2 \n$5,000 to $7,499 13.9 11.1 $7,500 to $9,999 6.7 22.2 $10,000 or more 5.6 11.1 \n \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language proficiency 3.3 0.0 \nSingle parent 31.8 6.7 \nUI status \nClaimant 6.6 0.0 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.3 86.7 \nPublic assistance recipient 21.5 13.3 \nTANF recipient 19.8 13.3 Other public assistance 4.1 0.0 \nHomeless 3.3 0.0 \nOffender 19.8 13.3 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.6 12.3 \n8\nth or less 0.4 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 0.0 \nHigh school graduate 50.4 66.7 \nHigh school equivalency 13.2 13.3 \nSome postsecondary 19.0 20.0 College graduate (4-year) 10.7 0.0 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 34Table II-7 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices \nLess than \nHigh School \nHigh School \nGraduate \nSome Post-\nsecondary \nCollege \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 242 16 154 46 26 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 242 16 154 46 26 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 7.4 6.3 9.1 6.5 0.0 \n22 to 29 26.9 18.8 29.9 21.7 23.1 30 to 44 37.2 31.3 38.3 34.8 38.5 \n45 to 54 17.8 43.8 13.6 21.7 19.2 \n55 and over 10.7 0.0 9.1 15.2 19.2 \nGender \nFemale 51.7 31.3 49.4 67.4 50.0 \nMale 48.3 68.8 50.6 32.6 50.0 \nIndividual with a disability 31.8 31.3 33.8 26.1 30.8 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.2 3.8 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.2 0.0 1.3 2.2 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) 3.7 0.0 3.9 2.2 7.7 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 93.8 100.0 94.8 91.3 88.5 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 6.2 0.0 7.8 6.5 0.0 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 3.3 0.0 3.9 4.4 0.0 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 35 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices \nLess than \nHigh School \nHigh School \nGraduate \nSome Post-\nsecondary \nCollege \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 242 16 154 46 26 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 12.8 0.0 13.0 10.9 23.1 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 87.2 100.0 87.0 89.1 76.9 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $4,697 $4,936 $4,552 $5,095 $4,234 \nNone 31.1 25.0 33.3 16.2 52.9 \n$1 to $2,499 22.6 16.7 24.3 21.6 17.6 \n$2,500 to $4,999 19.8 25.0 18.0 27.0 11.8 \n$5,000 to $7,499 14.1 16.7 14.4 16.2 5.9 $7,500 to $9,999 6.8 16.7 5.4 5.4 11.8 $10,000 or more 5.6 0.0 4.5 13.5 0.0 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.3 0.0 3.2 4.3 3.8 \nSingle parent 31.8 25.0 33.8 32.6 23.1 \nUI status \nClaimant 6.6 12.5 5.2 6.5 11.5 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.3 100.0 95.5 97.8 96.2 \nPublic assistance recipient 21.5 25.0 24.7 15.2 11.5 \nTANF recipient 19.8 25.0 22.7 13.0 11.5 Other public assistance 4.1 6.3 4.5 2.2 3.8 \nHomeless 3.3 6.3 3.9 2.2 0.0 \nOffender 19.8 25.0 24.7 13.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.6 10.3 12.0 13.6 16.1 \n8\nth or less 0.4 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 93.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHigh school graduate 50.4 0.0 79.2 0.0 0.0 \nHigh school equivalency 13.2 0.0 20.8 0.0 0.0 Some postsecondary 19.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 College graduate (4-year) 10.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 36Table II-8 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by UI Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters 242 16 16 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 242 16 16 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \nAge categories \n18 to 21 7.4 12.5 12.5 \n22 to 29 26.9 37.5 37.5 \n30 to 44 37.2 31.3 31.3 45 to 54 17.8 18.8 18.8 55 and over 10.7 0.0 0.0 \nGender \nFemale 51.7 37.5 37.5 \nMale 48.3 62.5 62.5 \nIndividual with a disability 31.8 18.8 18.8 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.8 0.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.2 0.0 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.7 12.5 12.5 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 93.8 87.5 87.5 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 6.2 0.0 0.0 \nDisabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCampaign veteran 3.3 0.0 0.0 Recently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 37 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters 242 16 0 16 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 12.8 25.0 25.0 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 87.2 75.0 75.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $4,697 $4,595 $4,595 \nNone 31.1 14.3 14.3 \n$1 to $2,499 22.6 21.4 21.4 $2,500 to $4,999 19.8 28.6 28.6 $5,000 to $7,499 14.1 21.4 21.4 $7,500 to $9,999 6.8 14.3 14.3 $10,000 or more 5.6 0.0 0.0 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.3 0.0 0.0 \nSingle parent 31.8 18.8 18.8 \nUI status \nClaimant 6.6 100.0 100.0 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.3 93.8 93.8 \nPublic assistance recipient 21.5 6.3 6.3 \nTANF recipient 19.8 6.3 6.3 \nOther public assistance 4.1 0.0 0.0 \nHomeless 3.3 0.0 0.0 \nOffender 19.8 6.3 6.3 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.6 12.9 12.9 \n8th or less 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 12.5 12.5 \nHigh school graduate 50.4 50.0 50.0 \nHigh school equivalency 13.2 0.0 0.0 Some postsecondary 19.0 18.8 18.8 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 10.7 18.8 18.8 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 38Table II-9 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Public Assistance \n Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 242 233 52 48 10 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 242 233 52 48 10 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 7.4 7.3 5.8 6.3 0.0 \n22 to 29 26.9 27.5 42.3 41.7 50.0 30 to 44 37.2 36.5 46.2 45.8 50.0 \n45 to 54 17.8 17.6 5.8 6.3 0.0 \n55 and over 10.7 11.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nGender \nFemale 51.7 52.8 73.1 70.8 80.0 \nMale 48.3 47.2 26.9 29.2 20.0 \nIndividual with a disability 31.8 31.3 30.8 29.2 40.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.8 0.9 3.8 4.2 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.2 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.7 3.9 1.9 2.1 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 93.8 93.6 94.2 93.8 100.0 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 6.2 5.6 3.8 4.2 0.0 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 3.3 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 39 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Public Assistance \n Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 242 233 52 48 10 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 12.8 12.0 9.6 8.3 20.0 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 87.2 88.0 90.4 91.7 80.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $4,697 $4,534 $2,749 $2,938 $605 \nNone 31.1 32.4 36.1 36.4 57.1 \n$1 to $2,499 22.6 23.5 41.7 39.4 42.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 19.8 20.0 2.8 3.0 0.0 \n$5,000 to $7,499 14.1 13.5 16.7 18.2 0.0 $7,500 to $9,999 6.8 5.3 2.8 3.0 0.0 $10,000 or more 5.6 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.3 2.6 1.9 2.1 0.0 \nSingle parent 31.8 33.0 73.1 70.8 80.0 \nUI status \nClaimant 6.6 6.4 1.9 2.1 0.0 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPublic assistance recipient 21.5 22.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nTANF recipient 19.8 20.6 92.3 100.0 60.0 Other public assistance 4.1 4.3 19.2 12.5 100.0 \nHomeless 3.3 3.4 7.7 6.3 10.0 \nOffender 19.8 20.2 23.1 22.9 30.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.6 12.6 12.3 12.3 12.5 \n8\nth or less 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 6.4 7.7 8.3 10.0 \nHigh school graduate 50.4 49.8 53.8 54.2 50.0 \nHigh school equivalency 13.2 13.3 19.2 18.8 20.0 Some postsecondary 19.0 19.3 13.5 12.5 10.0 College graduate (4-year) 10.7 10.7 5.8 6.3 10.0 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 40Table II-10 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \n who Received Intensive or Training Services, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Offender \nNumber of exiters 242 77 48 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 Local programs 242 77 48 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 7.4 2.6 8.3 \n22 to 29 26.9 35.1 27.1 \n30 to 44 37.2 50.6 52.1 \n45 to 54 17.8 9.1 8.3 55 and over 10.7 2.6 4.2 \nGender \nFemale 51.7 81.8 54.2 \nMale 48.3 18.2 45.8 \nIndividual with a disability 31.8 23.4 29.2 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.8 2.6 0.0 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.2 0.0 6.3 \nAsian (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.7 1.3 6.3 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 93.8 96.1 87.5 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 6.2 1.3 4.2 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCampaign veteran 3.3 0.0 0.0 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 41 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Offender \nNumber of exiters 242 0 77 0 48 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 12.8 15.6 6.3 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 87.2 84.4 93.8 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $4,697 $3,098 $3,032 \nNone 31.1 27.6 37.5 \n$1 to $2,499 22.6 36.2 37.5 \n$2,500 to $4,999 19.8 15.5 6.3 $5,000 to $7,499 14.1 17.2 12.5 $7,500 to $9,999 6.8 1.7 6.3 $10,000 or more 5.6 1.7 0.0 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.3 1.3 0.0 \nSingle parent 31.8 100.0 29.2 \nUI status \nClaimant 6.6 3.9 2.1 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.3 100.0 97.9 \nPublic assistance recipient 21.5 49.4 25.0 \nTANF recipient 19.8 44.2 22.9 Other public assistance 4.1 10.4 6.3 \nHomeless 3.3 2.6 6.3 \nOffender 19.8 18.2 100.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.6 12.5 12.0 \n8\nth or less 0.4 0.0 2.1 \nSome high school 6.2 5.2 6.3 \nHigh school graduate 50.4 54.5 58.3 \nHigh school equivalency 13.2 13.0 20.8 Some postsecondary 19.0 19.5 12.5 College graduate (4-year) 10.7 7.8 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 42Table II-11 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Major Service Categories \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \n \nAll Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 248 53 189 167 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 Local programs 248 53 189 167 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 7.3 9.4 6.9 6.0 \n22 to 29 27.4 17.0 29.6 29.3 30 to 44 36.7 49.1 33.9 33.5 45 to 54 17.7 13.2 19.0 19.2 \n55 and over 10.9 11.3 10.6 12.0 \nGender \nFemale 51.6 69.8 46.6 49.1 \nMale 48.4 30.2 53.4 50.9 \nIndividual with a disability 31.9 32.1 31.7 31.7 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.2 1.9 1.1 0.6 \nAsian (only) 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.6 5.7 3.2 3.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.0 88.7 95.2 96.4 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 6.0 5.7 6.3 6.6 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 3.2 1.9 3.7 4.2 Recently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 43 \n \nAll Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 248 0 53 189 167 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 12.5 17.0 11.6 11.4 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 87.5 83.0 88.4 88.6 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $4,676 $2,556 $5,168 $5,208 \nNone 31.7 33.3 30.6 25.0 \n$1 to $2,499 22.8 36.4 19.4 21.1 \n$2,500 to $4,999 19.4 21.2 19.4 21.1 \n$5,000 to $7,499 13.9 9.1 15.3 15.6 $7,500 to $9,999 6.7 0.0 8.3 9.4 $10,000 or more 5.6 0.0 6.9 7.8 \n \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.3 3.8 3.2 3.0 \nSingle parent 31.8 43.4 28.6 28.1 \nUI status \nClaimant 6.6 7.5 6.3 6.6 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.3 98.1 95.8 95.2 \nPublic assistance recipient 21.5 32.1 18.5 15.6 \nTANF recipient 19.8 28.3 17.5 14.4 Other public assistance 4.1 7.5 3.2 3.0 \nHomeless 3.3 5.7 2.6 3.0 \nOffender 19.8 32.1 16.4 15.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.6 12.9 12.6 12.6 \n8\nth or less 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.6 \nSome high school 6.2 3.8 6.9 6.6 \nHigh school graduate 50.4 47.2 51.3 50.3 \nHigh school equivalency 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.8 Some postsecondary 19.0 22.6 18.0 18.6 College graduate (4-year) 10.7 13.2 10.1 10.2 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 44Table II-12 \nNumber of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 with Specific Characteristics, \nby Major Service Categories \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \n \nAll Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 248 53 189 167 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 248 53 189 167 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \nAge categories \n18 to 21 18 5 13 10 \n22 to 29 68 9 56 49 \n30 to 44 91 26 64 56 45 to 54 44 7 36 32 55 and over 27 6 20 20 \nGender \nFemale 128 37 88 82 \nMale 120 16 101 85 \nIndividual with a disability 79 17 60 53 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2 2 0 0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 3 1 2 1 \nAsian (only) 1 0 1 0 \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) 9 3 6 5 \nHawaiian or other \nPacific Islander (only) 0 0 0 0 \nWhite (only) 233 47 180 161 \nMore than one race 0 0 0 0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 15 3 12 11 \nDisabled veteran 0 0 0 0 \nCampaign veteran 8 1 7 7 Recently separated veteran 0 0 0 0 Other eligible person 0 0 0 0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 45 \n \nAll Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 248 0 53 189 167 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 31 9 22 19 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 217 44 167 148 \nAverage preprogram \nquarterly earnings \nNone 57 11 44 32 \n$1 to $2,499 41 12 28 27 \n$2,500 to $4,999 35 7 28 27 \n$5,000 to $7,499 25 3 22 20 $7,500 to $9,999 12 0 12 12 $10,000 or more 10 0 10 10 \n \nCharacteristics of Exiters \nwho Received Intensive or \nTraining Services With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 8 2 6 5 \nSingle parent 77 23 54 47 \nUI status \nClaimant 16 4 12 11 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0 0 0 0 \nExhaustee 0 0 0 0 \nLow income 233 52 181 159 \nPublic assistance recipient 52 17 35 26 \nTANF recipient 48 15 33 24 Other public assistance 10 4 6 5 \nHomeless 8 3 5 5 \nOffender 48 17 31 25 \nHighest grade completed \n8\nth or less 1 0 1 1 \nSome high school 15 2 13 11 \nHigh school graduate 122 25 97 84 \nHigh school equivalency 32 7 25 23 Some postsecondary 46 12 34 31 College graduate (4-year) 26 7 19 17 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 46Table II-13 \nCharacteristics of Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Type of Training \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters 59 189 24 167 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 59 189 24 167 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \nAge categories \n18 to 21 8.5 6.9 12.5 6.0 22 to 29 20.3 29.6 33.3 29.3 30 to 44 45.8 33.9 33.3 33.5 \n45 to 54 13.6 19.0 20.8 19.2 \n55 and over 11.9 10.6 0.0 12.0 \nGender \nFemale 67.8 46.6 29.2 49.1 Male 32.2 53.4 70.8 50.9 \nIndividual with a disability 32.2 31.7 33.3 31.7 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.7 1.1 4.2 0.6 \nAsian (only) 0.0 0.5 4.2 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 5.1 3.2 4.2 3.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 89.8 95.2 87.5 96.4 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 5.1 6.3 8.3 6.6 Disabled veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 1.7 3.7 4.2 4.2 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 47 \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters 59 189 0 24 167 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 15.3 11.6 12.5 11.4 Not employed or received \nlayoff notice 84.7 88.4 87.5 88.6 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $2,535 $5,168 $4,768 $5,208 \nNone 36.1 30.6 70.6 25.0 \n$1 to $2,499 36.1 19.4 5.9 21.1 $2,500 to $4,999 19.4 19.4 5.9 21.1 \n$5,000 to $7,499 8.3 15.3 17.6 15.6 \n$7,500 to $9,999 0.0 8.3 0.0 9.4 $10,000 or more 0.0 6.9 0.0 7.8 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \nIntensive \nServices, No \nTraining \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.8 3.2 4.2 3.0 \nSingle parent 43.4 28.6 33.3 28.1 \nUI status \nClaimant 7.5 6.3 4.2 6.6 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 98.1 95.8 100.0 95.2 \nPublic assistance recipient 32.1 18.5 41.7 15.6 \nTANF recipient 28.3 17.5 41.7 14.4 Other public assistance 7.5 3.2 4.2 3.0 \nHomeless 5.7 2.6 0.0 3.0 \nOffender 32.1 16.4 25.0 15.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.9 12.6 12.4 12.6 \n8\nth or less 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.6 \nSome high school 3.8 6.9 8.3 6.6 \nHigh school graduate 47.2 51.3 58.3 50.3 \nHigh school equivalency 13.2 13.2 12.5 13.8 \nSome postsecondary 22.6 18.0 12.5 18.6 College graduate (4-year) 13.2 10.1 8.3 10.2 \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 48Table II-14 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 1.8 5.4 12.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 0.0 13.2 34.5 0.0 0.0 0.8 Partner program 79.6 72.8 73.6 15.6 28.4 16.9 \nWagner-Peyser 78.2 71.7 72.8 15.6 28.4 16.1 \nTAA 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker \nJobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 2.9 2.4 2.5 1.3 3.1 0.8 \nVocational Education 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nTitle V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 2.4 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 35.5 58.7 63.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core service s 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 33.3 39.9 42.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 28.8 34.4 36.8 99.4 98.8 97.6 \nPrevocational activities 3.8 4.0 5.2 1.3 3.7 8.9 \nTraining services 13.6 10.5 11.2 80.5 81.5 76.2 \nOn-the-job training 11.4 8.9 7.1 22.6 22.0 12.7 \nSkill upgrading & \nretraining 12.8 12.4 12.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in \ncombination with \ntraining 2.3 2.3 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 9.1 6.6 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 67.8 72.7 73.8 77.4 79.5 88.4 \nNeeds-related payments 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 8.7 6.5 7.0 58.4 57.4 61.7 \nPell Grant recipient 5.6 3.2 2.8 2.0 1.3 2.5 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 49 \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nService category \nCore services, including \nstaff assisted, only 71.2 65.6 63.2 0.6 1.2 2.4 \nIntensive & core services \nonly 15.1 23.9 25.7 18.8 17.3 21.4 \nTraining services 13.6 10.5 11.2 80.5 81.5 76.2 \nITA established 8.1 6.2 6.9 62.3 64.8 67.3 \nWeeks participated (average) 16.1 15.4 17.0 28.5 29.7 26.2 \n13 or fewer weeks 66.8 66.8 61.8 29.9 30.2 31.9 \n14 to 26 weeks 16.0 16.3 17.4 28.6 34.6 30.2 \n27 to 39 weeks 7.1 7.1 8.6 19.5 15.4 16.9 40 to 52 weeks 3.0 3.5 5.0 7.1 5.6 10.9 More than 52 weeks 7.1 6.4 7.3 14.9 14.2 10.1 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 30.2 29.3 26.5 24.2 24.0 22.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 44.6 47.3 49.7 41.9 45.5 44.4 \n14 to 26 weeks 19.1 17.7 19.5 29.0 28.8 24.9 27 to 39 weeks 10.8 9.8 9.8 14.5 12.1 16.9 40 to 52 weeks 7.7 7.5 6.4 3.2 4.5 6.9 More than 52 weeks 17.8 17.7 14.7 11.3 9.1 6.9 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 34.9 37.0 35.8 25.0 6.9 13.6 \nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occup. 20.3 21.1 20.1 3.6 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 20.5 21.3 22.4 0.0 0.0 4.5 \nHealthcare support occ. 15.2 15.9 17.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 12.7 11.6 11.3 3.6 3.4 9.1 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 3.9 4.6 4.5 3.6 6.9 13.6 \nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, \nmaterial moving 28.1 25.5 26.0 67.9 82.8 59.1 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.4 \nHealth/medical 0.4 0.2 0.2 10.4 6.2 5.2 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 Family care 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.4 Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 1.2 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 50Table II-15 \nNumber of Adults Exiters, by Services Received, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 14,760 55,618 148,579 0 0 0 \nWIA youth 4,303 5,214 5,488 0 0 0 ARRA-funded 0 136,100 400,958 0 0 2 Partner program 667,536 749,609 856,388 24 46 42 \nWagner-Peyser 655,594 739,092 846,285 24 46 40 \nTAA 4,080 4,485 8,424 0 0 0 National Farmworker \nJobs 44 423 293 0 0 0 \nVeterans programs 24,485 24,959 28,582 2 5 2 \nVocational Education 976 592 682 0 0 0 \nAdult Education 1,737 1,255 1,272 0 0 0 \nTitle V Older Worker 192 165 219 0 0 0 Other partner programs 20,184 19,325 23,606 0 0 2 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 297,250 605,131 740,374 0 0 0 \nStaff-assisted core services 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nWorkforce information 279,129 410,658 494,902 0 0 0 \nIntensive Services 241,181 354,382 428,522 153 160 242 \nPrevocational activities 31,541 41,557 60,096 2 6 22 \nTraining services 114,398 108,360 129,914 124 132 189 \nOn-the-job training 12,989 9,633 9,270 28 29 24 \nSkill upgrading & \nretraining 14,647 13,418 16,533 0 0 0 \nEntrepreneurial training 343 413 319 0 0 0 \nABE or ESL in \ncombination with training 2,612 2,544 3,457 0 0 0 \nCustomized training 10,425 7,197 8,594 0 0 0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 77,538 78,823 95,822 96 105 167 \nNeeds-related payments 4,806 4,440 3,068 0 0 0 \nOther supportive services 72,914 66,943 81,107 90 93 153 \nPell Grant recipient 13,528 11,204 11,929 3 2 6 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 51 \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 State \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 838,131 1,030,282 1,163,229 154 162 248 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 596,950 675,900 734,707 1 2 6 \nIntensive & core services \nonly 126,783 246,022 298,608 29 28 53 \nTraining services 114,398 108,360 129,914 124 132 189 \nITA established 67,663 63,852 79,955 96 105 167 \nWeeks participated (average) \n13 or fewer weeks 559,553 687,948 718,857 46 49 79 \n14 to 26 weeks 134,455 167,728 201,988 44 56 75 \n27 to 39 weeks 59,402 72,684 99,940 30 25 42 40 to 52 weeks 24,915 36,410 57,749 11 9 27 More than 52 weeks 59,806 65,512 84,695 23 23 25 \nWeeks of training \n13 or fewer weeks 50,474 51,035 64,074 52 60 84 \n14 to 26 weeks 21,563 19,152 25,132 36 38 47 27 to 39 weeks 12,217 10,567 12,580 18 16 32 40 to 52 weeks 8,670 8,081 8,243 4 6 13 \nMore than 52 weeks 20,179 19,097 18,963 14 12 13 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 28,442 28,862 31,459 7 2 3 \nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occupations 16,569 16,489 17,673 1 0 0 \nService occupations 16,709 16,628 19,742 0 0 1 \nHealthcare support occ. 12,383 12,377 15,229 0 0 0 \nSales and clerical 10,342 9,037 9,981 1 1 2 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 3,174 3,554 3,951 1 2 3 \nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, \nmaterial moving 22,909 19,925 22,833 19 24 13 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 1,201 1,134 1,009 1 1 1 \nHealth/medical 2,992 2,377 2,245 16 10 13 Deceased 256 224 291 1 1 0 Family care 1,018 696 575 0 0 0 Reserve called to active duty 82 86 65 0 1 1 Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 49 21 15 0 4 3 \nRetirement 40 43 60 0 0 0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 52Table II-16 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters fr om April 2009 to March 2010, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n 18 to 21 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 18 68 91 44 27 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 5.6 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nPartner program 27.8 20.6 13.2 18.2 11.1 \nWagner-Peyser 22.2 19.1 13.2 18.2 11.1 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 3.7 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 5.6 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core servi ces 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 95.6 98.9 97.7 96.3 \nPrevocational activities 0.0 4.4 8.8 13.6 18.5 \nTraining services 72.2 82.4 70.3 81.8 74.1 \nOn-the-job training 23.1 14.3 12.5 13.9 0.0 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 76.9 87.5 87.5 88.9 100.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 50.0 61.8 65.9 56.8 63.0 \nPell Grant recipient 5.6 0.0 4.4 2.3 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 53 Age at Participation \n 18 to 21 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 18 68 91 44 27 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 4.4 1.1 2.3 3.7 \nIntensive & core services only 27.8 13.2 28.6 15.9 22.2 \nTraining services 72.2 82.4 70.3 81.8 74.1 \nITA established 55.6 72.1 61.5 72.7 74.1 \nWeeks participated (average) 26.5 28.7 25.1 26.7 22.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.8 22.1 37.4 29.5 44.4 \n14 to 26 weeks 33.3 30.9 28.6 29.5 33.3 27 to 39 weeks 27.8 22.1 13.2 18.2 7.4 40 to 52 weeks 5.6 14.7 8.8 13.6 7.4 More than 52 weeks 5.6 10.3 12.1 9.1 7.4 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 19.6 25.5 20.1 23.1 21.7 \n13 or fewer weeks 61.5 32.1 53.1 41.7 45.0 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.8 26.8 21.9 19.4 35.0 27 to 39 weeks 0.0 23.2 10.9 30.6 5.0 40 to 52 weeks 0.0 8.9 7.8 2.8 10.0 \nMore than 52 weeks 7.7 8.9 6.3 5.6 5.0 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 0.0 0.0 14.3 40.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 0.0 12.5 0.0 40.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 100.0 75.0 57.1 20.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 0.0 4.4 5.5 6.8 7.4 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.0 2.9 0.0 2.3 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 54Table II-17 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from Apr il 2009 to March 2010, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 246 9 233 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 0.8 0.0 0.4 \nPartner program 17.1 22.2 16.7 \nWagner-Peyser 16.3 22.2 16.3 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.8 0.0 0.9 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.8 0.0 0.4 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 97.6 100.0 97.4 \nPrevocational activities 8.9 0.0 9.4 \nTraining services 76.8 66.7 77.3 \nOn-the-job training 12.7 16.7 11.7 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 88.4 83.3 89.4 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 61.8 44.4 61.8 \nPell Grant recipient 2.5 0.0 2.6 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 55 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 0 246 9 233 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 2.4 0.0 2.6 \nIntensive & core services only 20.7 33.3 20.2 \nTraining services 76.8 66.7 77.3 \nITA established 67.9 55.6 69.1 \nWeeks participated (average) 26.2 37.4 25.9 \n13 or fewer weeks 32.1 0.0 33.5 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.1 22.2 29.6 27 to 39 weeks 16.7 22.2 16.7 40 to 52 weeks 11.0 44.4 9.9 More than 52 weeks 10.2 11.1 10.3 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 22.4 32.0 22.2 \n13 or fewer weeks 44.4 0.0 45.6 \n14 to 26 weeks 24.9 50.0 23.9 27 to 39 weeks 16.9 0.0 17.8 40 to 52 weeks 6.9 33.3 6.1 \nMore than 52 weeks 6.9 16.7 6.7 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 13.6 0.0 15.8 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 4.5 0.0 5.3 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 9.1 0.0 10.5 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 13.6 100.0 10.5 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 59.1 0.0 57.9 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.4 0.0 0.4 \nHealth/medical 5.3 11.1 5.2 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.4 0.0 0.4 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 1.2 22.2 0.4 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 56Table II-18 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by \nEmployment at Participation, Gender, and Disability Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Employed at Participation Gender \n \nYes \nNo \nMale \nFemale With a \nDisability \nNumber of exiters 31 217 120 128 79 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 2.5 Partner program 29.0 15.2 20.0 14.1 13.9 \nWagner-Peyser 29.0 14.3 19.2 13.3 11.4 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 2.5 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core servi ces 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 97.2 97.5 97.7 97.5 \nPrevocational activities 16.1 7.8 5.0 12.5 8.9 \nTraining services 71.0 77.0 84.2 68.8 75.9 \nOn-the-job training 13.6 12.6 16.8 8.0 13.3 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 86.4 88.6 84.2 93.2 88.3 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 58.1 62.2 55.8 67.2 58.2 \nPell Grant recipient 9.7 1.4 1.7 3.2 3.9 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 57 Employed at Participation Gender \n \nYes \nNo \nMale \nFemale With a \nDisability \nNumber of exiters 31 217 120 128 79 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 2.8 2.5 2.3 2.5 \nIntensive & core services only 29.0 20.3 13.3 28.9 21.5 \nTraining services 71.0 77.0 84.2 68.8 75.9 \nITA established 61.3 68.2 70.8 64.1 67.1 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.2 25.5 24.4 27.9 24.2 \n13 or fewer weeks 22.6 33.2 30.8 32.8 32.9 \n14 to 26 weeks 22.6 31.3 34.2 26.6 32.9 \n27 to 39 weeks 32.3 14.7 15.8 18.0 17.7 40 to 52 weeks 6.5 11.5 10.8 10.9 11.4 More than 52 weeks 16.1 9.2 8.3 11.7 5.1 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 30.6 21.3 20.1 25.0 19.5 \n13 or fewer weeks 31.8 46.1 43.6 45.5 48.3 \n14 to 26 weeks 22.7 25.1 30.7 18.2 26.7 27 to 39 weeks 27.3 15.6 15.8 18.2 13.3 40 to 52 weeks 4.5 7.2 5.0 9.1 8.3 More than 52 weeks 13.6 6.0 5.0 9.1 3.3 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 50.0 10.0 13.3 14.3 28.6 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 5.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 10.0 6.7 14.3 14.3 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 50.0 10.0 13.3 14.3 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 0.0 65.0 66.7 42.9 57.1 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 1.3 \nHealth/medical 6.5 5.1 4.2 6.3 8.9 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.0 1.4 1.7 0.8 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 58Table II-19 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from Ap ril 2009 to March 2010, by Veteran Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran \nDisabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 248 15 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 0.8 0.0 Partner program 16.9 13.3 \nWagner-Peyser 16.1 13.3 \nTAA 0.0 0.0 \nNational Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.8 13.3 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 \nTitle V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 0.8 0.0 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 97.6 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 8.9 13.3 \nTraining services 76.2 80.0 \nOn-the-job training 12.7 16.7 \nSkill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 88.4 91.7 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 61.7 60.0 \nPell Grant recipient 2.5 6.7 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 59 \nAll Exiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran \nDisabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 248 15 0 0 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 2.4 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 21.4 20.0 \nTraining services 76.2 80.0 \nITA established 67.3 73.3 \nWeeks participated (average) 26.2 37.9 \n13 or fewer weeks 31.9 26.7 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.2 13.3 27 to 39 weeks 16.9 13.3 40 to 52 weeks 10.9 26.7 \nMore than 52 weeks 10.1 20.0 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 22.4 30.7 \n13 or fewer weeks 44.4 41.7 \n14 to 26 weeks 24.9 0.0 \n27 to 39 weeks 16.9 33.3 \n40 to 52 weeks 6.9 16.7 More than 52 weeks 6.9 8.3 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 13.6 50.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 4.5 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 9.1 0.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 13.6 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 59.1 50.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.4 0.0 \nHealth/medical 5.2 0.0 \nDeceased 0.0 0.0 \nFamily care 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.4 0.0 Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 1.2 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 60Table II-20 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 who Received Intensive or Training \nServices, by Highest Grade Completed \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive or \nTraining Services Less than \nHigh School High School \nGraduate Some Post-\nsecondary College \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 242 16 154 46 26\nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 0.8 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 \nPartner program 17.4 25.0 14.9 21.7 19.2 \nWagner-Peyser 16.5 25.0 13.6 21.7 19.2 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.8 0.0 0.6 2.2 0.0 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nTitle V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.8 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core servi ces 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.1 12.5 5.8 15.2 15.4 \nTraining services 78.1 87.5 79.2 73.9 73.1 \nOn-the-job training 12.7 14.3 13.9 8.8 10.5 \nSkill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 88.4 85.7 87.7 91.2 89.5 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 62.8 68.8 62.3 65.2 57.7 \nPell Grant recipient 2.5 0.0 1.9 6.5 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 61 With Intensive or \nTraining Services Less than \nHigh School High School \nGraduate Some Post-\nsecondary College \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 242 16 154 46 26\nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 21.9 12.5 20.8 26.1 26.9 \nTraining services 78.1 87.5 79.2 73.9 73.1 \nITA established 69.0 75.0 69.5 67.4 65.4 \nWeeks participated (average) 26.5 23.9 24.9 30.4 30.6 \n13 or fewer weeks 30.6 37.5 29.2 34.8 26.9 14 to 26 weeks 31.0 31.3 33.1 30.4 19.2 \n27 to 39 weeks 17.4 6.3 18.2 10.9 30.8 \n40 to 52 weeks 11.2 18.8 11.7 8.7 7.7 More than 52 weeks 9.9 6.3 7.8 15.2 15.4 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 22.4 21.3 19.6 29.1 29.1 \n13 or fewer weeks 44.4 42.9 46.7 41.2 36.8 \n14 to 26 weeks 24.9 28.6 26.2 23.5 15.8 \n27 to 39 weeks 16.9 7.1 16.4 17.6 26.3 40 to 52 weeks 6.9 14.3 6.6 5.9 5.3 More than 52 weeks 6.9 7.1 4.1 11.8 15.8 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 13.6 0.0 13.3 0.0 50.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 4.5 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 9.1 0.0 13.3 0.0 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 13.6 50.0 13.3 0.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 59.1 50.0 53.3 100.0 50.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 5.4 6.3 5.8 4.3 3.8 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 1.2 0.0 0.6 0.0 7.7 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 62Table II-21 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by UI Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters 242 16 16 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 0.8 0.0 0.0 \nPartner program 17.4 100.0 100.0 \nWagner-Peyser 16.5 100.0 100.0 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.8 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.8 0.0 0.0 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.1 12.5 12.5 \nTraining services 78.1 75.0 75.0 \nOn-the-job training 12.7 8.3 8.3 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 88.4 91.7 91.7 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 62.8 56.3 56.3 \nPell Grant recipient 2.5 6.3 6.3 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 63 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters 242 16 0 16 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 21.9 25.0 25.0 \nTraining services 78.1 75.0 75.0 \nITA established 69.0 68.8 68.8 \nWeeks participated (average) 26.5 33.7 33.7 \n13 or fewer weeks 30.6 25.0 25.0 \n14 to 26 weeks 31.0 18.8 18.8 \n27 to 39 weeks 17.4 12.5 12.5 40 to 52 weeks 11.2 25.0 25.0 More than 52 weeks 9.9 18.8 18.8 \nWeeks of training (average among \nwith training) 22.4 19.9 19.9 \n13 or fewer weeks 44.4 58.3 58.3 \n14 to 26 weeks 24.9 8.3 8.3 27 to 39 weeks 16.9 16.7 16.7 40 to 52 weeks 6.9 8.3 8.3 More than 52 weeks 6.9 8.3 8.3 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 13.6 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 4.5 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 9.1 0.0 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 13.6 100.0 100.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 59.1 0.0 0.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 5.4 0.0 0.0 \nDeceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nFamily care 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.4 0.0 0.0 Relocated to mandated residential \nprogram 1.2 6.3 6.3 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 64Table II-22 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Public Assistance \n Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 242 233 52 48 10 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nPartner program 17.4 17.2 9.6 8.3 10.0 \nWagner-Peyser 16.5 16.3 9.6 8.3 10.0 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core servi ces 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.1 9.0 5.8 4.2 20.0 \nTraining services 78.1 77.7 67.3 68.8 60.0 \nOn-the-job training 12.7 13.3 28.6 30.3 16.7 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 88.4 87.8 74.3 72.7 83.3 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 62.8 63.5 67.3 66.7 70.0 \nPell Grant recipient 2.5 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 65 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Public Assistance \n Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 242 233 52 48 10 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 21.9 22.3 32.7 31.3 40.0 \nTraining services 78.1 77.7 67.3 68.8 60.0 \nITA established 69.0 68.2 50.0 50.0 50.0 \nWeeks participated (average) 26.5 26.3 23.7 23.4 17.7 \n13 or fewer weeks 30.6 30.9 23.1 22.9 30.0 \n14 to 26 weeks 31.0 30.5 40.4 43.8 40.0 \n27 to 39 weeks 17.4 17.6 17.3 14.6 20.0 40 to 52 weeks 11.2 11.6 15.4 14.6 10.0 More than 52 weeks 9.9 9.4 3.8 4.2 0.0 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 22.4 22.2 19.6 18.8 18.3 \n13 or fewer weeks 44.4 44.2 37.1 39.4 33.3 \n14 to 26 weeks 24.9 24.9 37.1 39.4 33.3 27 to 39 weeks 16.9 17.1 17.1 15.2 16.7 40 to 52 weeks 6.9 7.2 2.9 0.0 16.7 More than 52 weeks 6.9 6.6 5.7 6.1 0.0 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 13.6 13.6 20.0 20.0 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 4.5 4.5 10.0 10.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 9.1 9.1 20.0 20.0 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 13.6 13.6 10.0 10.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 59.1 59.1 40.0 40.0 100.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.4 0.4 1.9 2.1 10.0 \nHealth/medical 5.4 5.6 9.6 8.3 20.0 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.4 0.4 1.9 2.1 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 1.2 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 66Table II-23 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Offender \nNumber of exiters 242 77 48 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 0.8 0.0 2.1 Partner program 17.4 14.3 8.3 \nWagner-Peyser 16.5 14.3 6.3 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNational Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 0.8 0.0 0.0 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 0.8 0.0 2.1 \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.1 10.4 6.3 \nTraining services 78.1 70.1 64.6 \nOn-the-job training 12.7 14.8 19.4 \nSkill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 88.4 87.0 80.6 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 62.8 67.5 58.3 \nPell Grant recipient 2.5 2.6 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 67 With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Offender \nNumber of exiters 242 0 77 0 48 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 21.9 29.9 35.4 \nTraining services 78.1 70.1 64.6 \nITA established 69.0 61.0 52.1 \nWeeks participated (average) 26.5 28.1 23.9 \n13 or fewer weeks 30.6 28.6 33.3 14 to 26 weeks 31.0 31.2 31.3 27 to 39 weeks 17.4 19.5 14.6 40 to 52 weeks 11.2 11.7 12.5 \nMore than 52 weeks 9.9 9.1 8.3 \nWeeks of training (average among \nwith training) 22.4 26.5 19.2 \n13 or fewer weeks 44.4 38.9 54.8 \n14 to 26 weeks 24.9 25.9 16.1 \n27 to 39 weeks 16.9 18.5 9.7 \n40 to 52 weeks 6.9 7.4 16.1 More than 52 weeks 6.9 9.3 3.2 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 13.6 14.3 20.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 4.5 14.3 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 9.1 14.3 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 13.6 14.3 20.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 59.1 42.9 60.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.4 0.0 2.1 \nHealth/medical 5.4 3.9 4.2 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated residential \nprogram 1.2 0.0 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 68Table II-24 \nServices Received by Adult Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNumber of \nExiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNation 1,163,229 63.2 25.7 11.2 6.9 \nAlabama 2,066 0.0 32.0 68.0 42.6 Alaska 427 0.2 19.0 80.8 50.6 Arizona 2,956 27.8 24.3 47.9 25.0 Arkansas 1,185 0.4 17.1 82.4 79.1 \nCalifornia 78,164 31.9 57.7 10.4 4.9 \nColorado 2,152 0.2 23.3 76.4 66.7 Connecticut 1,098 6.2 20.3 73.5 27.4 Delaware 516 0.8 10.3 89.0 89.0 District of Columbia 704 21.3 20.9 57.8 53.8 Florida 19,825 13.3 7.9 78.9 17.0 \nGeorgia 2,930 8.7 19.1 72.2 68.5 \nHawaii 189 2.1 48.7 49.2 33.3 Idaho 556 0.2 20.3 79.5 69.2 Illinois 6,590 6.1 35.7 58.1 52.7 Indiana 133,161 26.3 68.8 5.0 3.4 \nIowa 7,240 92.5 1.2 6.4 2.0 \nKansas 12,086 78.2 14.1 7.7 7.4 Kentucky 3,502 0.0 35.3 64.6 54.2 Louisiana 129,855 96.8 0.7 2.5 1.7 Maine 413 6.1 15.3 78.7 75.1 Maryland 1,589 4.5 47.6 47.9 15.5 \nMassachusetts 2,194 0.0 30.8 69.2 68.4 \nMichigan 7,995 8.9 23.1 68.1 42.1 Minnesota 1,517 11.3 48.5 40.3 39.9 Mississippi 16,600 59.7 12.3 28.0 14.4 Missouri 3,219 18.9 36.8 44.2 18.5 \nMontana 335 1.2 14.0 84.8 65.4 \nNebraska 551 0.0 14.2 85.8 84.4 Nevada 1,620 9.4 61.9 28.7 26.5 New Hampshire 546 9.5 21.8 68.7 67.8 New Jersey 2,148 1.0 29.3 69.7 66.7 \nNew Mexico 4,076 70.0 10.2 19.8 10.2 \nNew York 340,364 75.5 20.1 4.4 3.3 North Carolina 3,430 0.0 24.5 75.5 75.5 North Dakota 749 23.0 37.7 39.4 30.7 Ohio 8,980 20.5 24.1 55.4 44.7 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 69 \nNumber of \nExiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nOklahoma 57,572 94.6 3.1 2.4 2.3 \nOregon 151,148 78.6 20.0 1.4 0.4 Pennsylvania 4,523 30.3 21.9 47.8 27.8 Puerto Rico 3,181 25.5 50.2 24.3 8.0 \nRhode Island 729 22.6 18.8 58.6 56.8 \nSouth Carolina 12,027 0.2 56.2 43.6 32.2 South Dakota 709 0.0 50.6 49.4 30.6 Tennessee 6,513 18.6 11.5 69.9 44.2 Texas 20,752 2.2 61.8 36.0 20.6 \nUtah 96,301 80.3 11.4 8.2 2.7 \nVermont 248 2.4 21.4 76.2 67.3 Virgin Islands 365 1.9 29.6 68.5 67.4 Virginia 1,837 2.7 27.2 70.1 63.4 Washington 2,793 4.8 46.4 48.8 31.0 West Virginia 713 8.0 27.2 64.8 39.6 \nWisconsin 1,902 4.7 40.7 54.5 47.0 \nWyoming 388 0.3 27.8 71.9 57.5 \n \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 70Table II-25 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 894,026 962,610 1,092,642 160 142 176 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter \nafter exit) (excludes employed at \nentry) 68.3 59.9 54.2 77.5 68.6 63.4 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 80.7 77.9 78.6 83.9 80.5 78.1 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd \nqtrs. quarters $14,601 $13,680 $13,441 $12,400 $10,617 $10,291 \nOther WIA Performance and \n12-Month Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit 83.8 81.3 82.1 85.7 85.1 87.5 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit1 78.4 78.4 83.0 78.9 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit $633 $-530 $-954 $5,203 $3,217 $2,220 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit $626 $-457 $5,203 $3,695 \nCredential and employment rate 55.6 53.3 51.1 58.7 62.1 48.5 \nInformation about \nEmployment in Quarter after \nexit \nOccupation of employment \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 22.6 22.6 25.3 22.2 18.3 11.5 \nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occupations 12.3 12.4 13.4 7.8 8.5 4.9 \nService occupations 23.4 24.3 24.7 7.8 8.5 24.6 \nHealthcare support occup. 10.6 11.2 12.0 0.0 4.2 14.8 \nSales and clerical 21.5 21.4 19.9 18.9 15.5 11.5 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 5.4 5.2 5.2 6.7 5.6 4.9 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material \nmoving 27.1 26.6 24.9 44.4 52.1 47.5 \nNontraditional employment 1.2 1.5 1.5 4.5 4.6 1.9 \nMales 1.0 1.2 1.2 3.1 2.3 3.9 \nFemales 1.4 1.8 1.9 6.3 7.0 0.0 \n \n1 Data for exiters before July 2004 do not include supplemental data on employment. Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 71 Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 894,026 962,610 1,092,642 160 142 176 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit 71.6 64.1 58.3 77.8 71.3 66.9 \nSecond quarter after exit 70.8 63.3 59.0 76.4 68.0 68.3 \nThird quarter after exit 68.3 61.3 58.9 71.5 66.4 71.1 \nFourth quarter after exit 65.1 61.8 70.1 62.9 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit $6,384 $5,924 $5,679 $5,682 $5,034 $4,547 \nSecond quarter after exit $6,699 $6,144 $6,037 $5,512 $5,075 $5,344 \nThird quarter after exit $6,660 $6,205 $6,149 $6,068 $4,898 $4,800 Fourth quarter after exit $6,532 $6,396 $5,664 $5,335 \nEarnings quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 25.3 28.5 30.4 12.5 21.8 32.4 $2,500 to $4,999 26.0 26.7 26.9 27.7 27.6 23.8 \n$5,000 to $7,499 19.8 19.0 18.2 38.4 33.3 29.5 \n$7,500 to $9,999 11.4 10.6 10.2 14.3 11.5 10.5 $10,000 or more 17.5 15.2 14.3 7.1 5.7 3.8 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 24.0 26.3 26.8 19.4 25.9 21.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 25.0 25.9 25.7 22.3 29.6 37.5 \n$5,000 to $7,499 20.2 19.7 19.5 28.2 22.2 18.8 $7,500 to $9,999 12.0 11.6 11.7 14.6 13.6 9.4 $10,000 or more 18.8 16.5 16.3 15.5 8.6 12.5 \nAttained Credential (among \nwith training) 63.1 61.6 60.6 71.9 76.7 66.9 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.5 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 7.1 7.2 6.2 0.8 1.9 1.5 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 47.7 48.5 49.1 69.4 70.9 59.6 \nOther 7.1 4.7 4.1 0.8 2.9 4.4 \nNote: Outcome data for exiters from April 2008 to Ma rch 2009 are incomplete. Data for outcomes in the \nfourth quarter after exit are ba sed on 9 months of exiters. \nOutcome data for exiters from October 2008 to Sept ember 2009 do not include fourth quarter outcomes; \nsecond and third quarter outcomes are based on 9 and 6 months of exiters, respectively. Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 72Table II-26 \nNumber of Adult Exiters Attaining Outcomes, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 894,026 962,610 1,092,642 160 142 176\nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter \nafter exit) (excludes employed at \nentry) 494,493 467,689 490,358 93 70 85\nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 513,370 475,467 225,105 94 70 25\nOther WIA Performance and \n12-Month Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit 532,983 496,112 235,167 96 74 28\nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit1 498,714 363,833 109,552 93 56 12\nCredential and employment rate 62,422 55,847 55,977 71 64 66\nInformation about \nEmployment in Quarter after \nexit \nOccupation of employment \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 13,765 12,333 12,876 20 13 7\nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occupations 7,492 6,775 6,843 7 6 3\nService occupations 14,287 13,284 12,593 7 6 15\nHealthcare support occup. 6,443 6,146 6,096 0 3 9\nSales and clerical 13,080 11,709 10,133 17 11 7\nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 3,299 2,816 2,626 6 4 3\nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, and material moving 16,540 14,515 12,706 40 37 29\nOccupation not reported 574,837 555,600 579,086 22 16 44\nNontraditional employment 6,292 7,600 8,194 5 4 2\nMales 2,880 3,329 3,528 2 1 2Females 3,412 4,271 4,666 3 3 0\n \n1 Data for exiters before July 2004 do not include supplemental data on employment. Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 73 Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 894,026 962,610 1,092,642 160 142 176\nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit 635,808 610,257 630,020 112 87 105\nSecond quarter after exit 628,483 602,604 458,391 110 83 69\nThird quarter after exit 606,475 583,935 289,702 103 81 32\nFourth quarter after exit 577,677 432,988 140,292 101 61 13\nEarnings quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 158,277 171,129 188,524 14 19 34$2,500 to $4,999 162,441 160,101 166,597 31 24 25\n$5,000 to $7,499 123,646 113,908 112,923 43 29 31\n$7,500 to $9,999 71,419 63,599 63,122 16 10 11$10,000 or more 109,295 91,433 88,411 8 5 4\nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 142,854 151,092 76,431 20 21 7$2,500 to $4,999 148,925 148,749 73,398 23 24 12\n$5,000 to $7,499 120,268 113,181 55,609 29 18 6\n$7,500 to $9,999 71,716 66,465 33,275 15 11 3$10,000 or more 112,041 94,655 46,653 16 7 4\nAttained Credential (among \nwith training) 70,874 64,587 66,343 87 79 91\nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1,308 1,237 1,258 1 1 2\nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 7,949 7,587 6,839 1 2 2\nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 53,636 50,881 53,763 84 73 81\nOther 7,981 4,882 4,483 1 3 6\n \nNote: Outcome data for exiters from April 2008 to Ma rch 2009 are incomplete. Data for outcomes in the \nfourth quarter after exit are ba sed on 9 months of exiters. \nOutcome data for exiters from October 2008 to Sept ember 2009 do not include fourth quarter outcomes; \nsecond and third quarter outcomes are based on 9 and 6 months of exiters, respectively. Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 74Table II-27 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n 18 to 21 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters1 13 37 77 35 14 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 70.0 61.5 57.1 79.3 53.8 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 100.0 68.4 87.5 70.6 66.7 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $9,398 $10,296 $11,173 $10,322 $9,630 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 100.0 73.7 90.0 82.4 66.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 100.0 52.9 90.6 78.6 50.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $5,412 $3,193 $4,586 $19 $-2,610 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $5,768 $2,923 $4,849 $2,308 $-4,710 \nCredential and employment rate1 70.0 48.3 41.8 55.2 46.2 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 14.3 13.3 10.0 13.3 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 8.3 4.3 11.4 8.3 0.0 \nService occupations 14.3 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 13.0 9.1 8.3 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 20.0 10.0 13.3 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 0.0 13.3 0.0 6.7 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 71.4 33.3 45.0 46.7 75.0 \nNontraditional employment\n1 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.2 0.0 \nMales 0.0 9.1 0.0 7.7 0.0 \nFemales 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 75 Age at Participation \n 18 to 21 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 13 37 77 35 14 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 75.0 64.7 62.7 80.0 57.1 \nSecond quarter after exit4 75.0 70.6 63.6 69.2 57.1 \nThird quarter after exit2 83.3 53.6 72.2 65.2 40.0 \nFourth quarter after exit3 80.0 41.7 75.6 61.1 25.0 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $6,098 $4,707 $3,759 $5,924 $2,359 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,766 $4,641 $4,456 $5,583 $5,576 \nThird quarter after exit2 $4,035 $5,116 $5,058 $4,971 $3,918 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $4,033 $5,914 $5,646 $5,044 $3,517 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 22.2 31.8 40.5 16.7 50.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 33.3 18.2 26.2 16.7 37.5 $5,000 to $7,499 22.2 31.8 28.6 37.5 12.5 \n$7,500 to $9,999 0.0 18.2 2.4 25.0 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 22.2 0.0 2.4 4.2 0.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 40.0 20.0 23.1 33.3 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 20.0 26.7 35.9 20.0 50.0 $5,000 to $7,499 30.0 33.3 12.8 26.7 50.0 \n$7,500 to $9,999 0.0 13.3 20.5 6.7 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 10.0 6.7 7.7 13.3 0.0 \nAttained Credential (among with \ntraining)\n1 90.0 65.5 61.8 72.4 61.5 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 0.0 0.0 1.8 3.4 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 10.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 60.0 62.1 54.5 65.5 61.5 \nOther 20.0 3.4 3.6 3.4 0.0 \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 76Table II-28 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n \nAll Black \n(only) White \n(only) \nOther \nNumber of exiters1 174 166 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after exit) \n(excludes employed at entry)1 63.2 63.8 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 80.2 81.0 \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd qtrs.2 $10,626 $10,539 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after \nexit2 84.9 84.8 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after \nexit3 78.6 78.1 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $3,200 $2,927 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $3,681 $3,498 \nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 48.5 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & technical 11.7 10.5 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 8.6 8.2 \nService occupations 23.3 24.6 \nHealthcare support occup. 8.6 9.3 \nSales and clerical 11.7 12.3 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 5.0 3.5 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 48.3 49.1 \nNontraditional employment1 1.9 2.0 \nMales 3.9 4.3 \nFemales 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 77 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n \nAll Black \n(only) White \n(only) \nOther \nNumber of exiters 0 174 0 166 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 66.7 66.7 \nSecond quarter after exit4 66.2 67.2 \nThird quarter after exit2 65.8 65.2 \nFourth quarter after exit3 62.1 61.4 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $4,535 $4,502 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,905 $4,897 \nThird quarter after exit2 $4,923 $4,936 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,413 $5,472 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 32.7 33.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 24.0 25.0 \n$5,000 to $7,499 28.8 28.0 \n$7,500 to $9,999 10.6 10.0 $10,000 or more 3.8 4.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 25.3 24.7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 30.4 32.9 \n$5,000 to $7,499 21.5 19.2 \n$7,500 to $9,999 13.9 13.7 $10,000 or more 8.9 9.6 \nAttained Credential (among with \ntraining)\n1 66.9 67.7 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.5 1.5 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 1.5 1.5 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 60.0 \nOther 4.4 4.6 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 78Table II-29 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters, by Employment at Pa rticipation, Gender, and Disability Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Employed at Participation Gender \n \nYes \nNo \nMale \nFemale With a \nDisability \nNumber of exiters1 23 153 93 83 40 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after exit) \n(excludes employed at entry)1 63.4 60.0 67.2 58.6 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 94.1 77.1 75.0 86.0 85.7 \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 $12,725 $9,993 $12,636 $8,817 $9,522 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-Month \nOutcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after exit2 94.1 82.9 81.8 88.4 85.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after exit3 85.7 77.2 76.5 81.1 83.3 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $6,757 $2,358 $4,024 $2,392 $4,320 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $6,462 $3,016 $3,915 $3,494 $3,312 \nCredential and employment rate1 47.6 48.7 50.6 45.8 43.3 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & technical 35.7 4.3 9.7 13.3 16.7 \nHealthcare practitioners and technical \noccupations 10.0 8.0 5.8 10.9 5.3 \nService occupations 14.3 27.7 3.2 46.7 25.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 10.0 8.0 1.9 14.5 10.5 \nSales and clerical 14.3 10.6 3.2 20.0 8.3 Farming, fishing, forestry, construction \nand extraction 7.1 4.3 9.7 0.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 28.6 53.2 74.2 20.0 50.0 \nNontraditional employment\n1 0.0 2.4 3.9 0.0 5.0 \nMales 0.0 4.8 3.9 8.3 Females 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 79 Employed at Participation Gender \n \nYes \nNo \nMale \nFemale With a \nDisability \nNumber of exiters 23 153 93 83 40 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 87.0 63.4 62.2 72.0 60.6 \nSecond quarter after exit4 81.0 64.5 55.6 78.1 58.8 \nThird quarter after exit2 80.0 63.7 63.5 69.5 53.6 \nFourth quarter after exit3 70.6 61.3 58.3 67.3 52.0 \nAverage earnings (among with earnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $5,628 $4,292 $4,900 $4,213 $4,199 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $6,576 $4,518 $5,608 $4,367 $4,613 \nThird quarter after exit2 $6,312 $4,550 $5,967 $3,856 $4,316 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $6,132 $5,140 $6,105 $4,681 $3,889 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 25.0 34.1 27.5 37.0 35.0 $2,500 to $4,999 15.0 25.9 23.5 24.1 25.0 $5,000 to $7,499 40.0 27.1 29.4 29.6 30.0 \n$7,500 to $9,999 15.0 9.4 13.7 7.4 10.0 \n$10,000 or more 5.0 3.5 5.9 1.9 0.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 0.0 32.3 17.5 34.1 26.7 $2,500 to $4,999 43.8 26.2 17.5 41.5 33.3 $5,000 to $7,499 31.3 20.0 35.0 9.8 26.7 \n$7,500 to $9,999 6.3 15.4 20.0 7.3 6.7 \n$10,000 or more 18.8 6.2 10.0 7.3 6.7 \nAttained Credential (among with training)\n \n(among received training)1 52.4 69.6 75.3 55.9 63.3 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 0.0 1.7 1.3 1.7 3.3 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college degree 0.0 1.7 1.3 1.7 0.0 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 47.6 61.7 66.2 50.8 60.0 \nOther 4.8 4.3 6.5 1.7 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 80Table II-30 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters, by Veteran Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll \nExiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran \nDisabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters1 176 11 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after exit) \n(excludes employed at entry)1 63.4 62.5 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 80.5 71.4 \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 $10,617 $11,503 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-Month \nOutcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after exit2 85.1 71.4 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after exit3 78.9 57.1 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $3,217 $2,136 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $3,695 $2,136 \nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 62.5 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & technical 11.5 20.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 8.4 11.1 \nService occupations 24.6 20.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 8.4 0.0 \nSales and clerical 11.5 20.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, construction \nand extraction 4.9 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 47.5 40.0 \nNontraditional employment1 1.9 20.0 \nMales 3.9 33.3 Females 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 81 \nAll \nExiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran \nDisabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 176 11 0 0 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 66.9 62.5 \nSecond quarter after exit4 66.9 37.5 \nThird quarter after exit2 66.4 55.6 \nFourth quarter after exit3 62.9 50.0 \nAverage earnings (among with earnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $4,547 $6,710 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,879 $6,628 \nThird quarter after exit2 $4,898 $4,956 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,335 $5,879 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 32.4 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.8 20.0 $5,000 to $7,499 29.5 60.0 $7,500 to $9,999 10.5 20.0 $10,000 or more 3.8 0.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 25.9 20.0 $2,500 to $4,999 29.6 0.0 $5,000 to $7,499 22.2 60.0 $7,500 to $9,999 13.6 20.0 $10,000 or more 8.6 0.0 \nAttained Credential (among received \ntraining)\n1 66.9 75.0 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.5 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 1.5 0.0 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 75.0 \nOther 4.4 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 82Table II-31 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters who Received Intensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool High \nSchool \nGraduate \nSome Post-\nsecondary \nCollege \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters1 174 17 102 38 17\nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 64.4 73.3 59.0 76.7 55.6 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 80.5 93.3 73.3 93.3 75.0 \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd \nquarters2 $10,617 $9,159 $10,028 $11,450 $13,752\nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after \nexit2 85.1 93.3 77.8 93.3 91.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after \nexit3 78.9 91.7 71.8 84.6 85.7 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $3,217 $2,061 $2,233 $6,877 $3,777\n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $3,695 $2,887 $1,868 $7,056 $9,021\nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 75.0 50.6 37.5 38.5 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 11.5 0.0 3.0 25.0 37.5 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 8.4 0.0 5.3 19.0 16.7 \nService occupations 24.6 12.5 24.2 41.7 12.5 \nHealthcare support occup. 8.4 0.0 10.5 9.5 8.3 \nSales and clerical 11.5 12.5 9.1 16.7 12.5 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 4.9 0.0 6.1 0.0 12.5 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material \nmoving 47.5 75.0 57.6 16.7 25.0 \nNontraditional employment1 1.9 0.0 1.8 3.7 0.0 \nMales 3.9 0.0 3.3 11.1 0.0 Females 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 83 With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool High \nSchool \nGraduate \nSome Post-\nsecondary \nCollege \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 174 17 102 38 17\nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 67.7 73.3 62.9 77.1 68.8 \nSecond quarter after exit4 67.8 72.2 67.5 71.4 57.1 \nThird quarter after exit2 66.9 73.7 60.6 71.4 80.0 \nFourth quarter after exit3 62.9 80.0 55.4 70.6 66.7 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $4,547 $4,105 $4,246 $4,933 $5,570\nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,879 $3,915 $4,549 $5,352 $7,569\nThird quarter after exit2 $4,898 $4,528 $4,672 $5,236 $5,662\nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,335 $5,739 $4,741 $5,865 $6,534\nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 32.4 54.5 32.1 25.9 27.3 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.8 0.0 28.6 25.9 18.2 $5,000 to $7,499 29.5 36.4 26.8 37.0 18.2 \n$7,500 to $9,999 10.5 9.1 8.9 3.7 36.4 \n$10,000 or more 3.8 0.0 3.6 7.4 0.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 25.9 28.6 30.0 20.0 16.7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 29.6 21.4 30.0 33.3 33.3 $5,000 to $7,499 22.2 35.7 17.5 26.7 16.7 \n$7,500 to $9,999 13.6 14.3 12.5 13.3 16.7 \n$10,000 or more 8.6 0.0 10.0 6.7 16.7 \nAttained Credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 66.9 91.7 74.7 43.8 53.8 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.5 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 1.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 58.3 67.1 43.8 53.8 \nOther 4.4 16.7 5.1 0.0 0.0 \n \n \nased on exiters from Oct ober 2008 to September 2009. \nased on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \nased on exiters from Janua ry 2008 to December 2008. \nased on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 84Table II-32 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters who Received Intensiv e or Training Services, by UI Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices UI Claimant \nUI \nExhaustee \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS \nNumber of exiters1 174 16 16 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after exit) \n(excludes employed at entry)1 64.4 83.3 83.3 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 80.5 66.7 66.7 \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 $10,617 $6,933 $6,933 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-Month \nOutcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after exit2 85.1 77.8 77.8 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after exit3 78.9 100.0 100.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $3,217 $-2,028 $-2,028 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $3,695 $-3,665 $-3,665 \nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 61.5 61.5 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & technical 11.5 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 8.4 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 24.6 10.0 10.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 8.4 7.1 7.1 \nSales and clerical 11.5 10.0 10.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, construction \nand extraction 4.9 20.0 20.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 47.5 60.0 60.0 \nNontraditional employment\n1 1.9 0.0 0.0 \nMales 3.9 0.0 0.0 Females 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 85 With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices UI Claimant \nUI \nExhaustee \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS \nNumber of exiters 174 16 0 16 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 67.7 86.7 86.7 \nSecond quarter after exit4 67.8 78.6 78.6 \nThird quarter after exit2 66.9 70.0 70.0 \nFourth quarter after exit3 62.9 83.3 83.3 \nAverage earnings (among with earnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $4,547 $4,780 $4,780 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,879 $4,379 $4,379 \nThird quarter after exit2 $4,898 $2,864 $2,864 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,335 $2,579 $2,579 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 32.4 30.8 30.8 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.8 30.8 30.8 $5,000 to $7,499 29.5 15.4 15.4 $7,500 to $9,999 10.5 15.4 15.4 \n$10,000 or more 3.8 7.7 7.7 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 25.9 42.9 42.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 29.6 42.9 42.9 $5,000 to $7,499 22.2 14.3 14.3 $7,500 to $9,999 13.6 0.0 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 8.6 0.0 0.0 \nAttained credential (among received \ntraining)\n1 66.9 76.9 76.9 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.5 7.7 7.7 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 1.5 0.0 0.0 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 53.8 53.8 \nOther 4.4 15.4 15.4 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 86Table II-33 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters who Received Intensive or Training Services, \nby Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive or \nTraining Services Low \nIncome Public Assistance \n Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters1 174 167 32 30 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after exit) \n(excludes employed at entry)1 64.4 65.4 72.0 70.8 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 80.5 80.7 100.0 100.0 \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd qtrs.2 $10,617 $10,712 $8,769 $7,417 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after \nexit2 85.1 85.5 100.0 100.0 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after \nexit3 78.9 79.4 92.9 88.9 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $3,217 $3,497 $5,852 $4,064 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $3,695 $4,034 $6,436 $4,864 \nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 49.6 56.5 52.4 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 11.5 10.5 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 8.4 7.8 8.7 5.9 \nService occupations 24.6 26.3 30.8 36.4 \nHealthcare support occup. 8.4 8.8 8.7 11.8 \nSales and clerical 11.5 10.5 15.4 18.2 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 4.9 5.3 7.7 9.1 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 47.5 47.4 46.2 36.4 \nNontraditional employment11.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 \nMales 3.9 4.1 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 87 With Intensive or \nTraining Services Low \nIncome Public Assistance \n Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 174 167 32 30 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 67.7 68.2 75.0 73.1 \nSecond quarter after exit4 67.8 67.6 71.0 66.7 \nThird quarter after exit2 66.9 66.7 70.4 61.9 \nFourth quarter after exit3 62.9 62.8 75.0 66.7 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $4,547 $4,390 $3,559 $3,259 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,879 $4,769 $4,486 $4,443 \nThird quarter after exit2 $4,898 $4,946 $3,932 $3,091 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,335 $5,309 $4,146 $3,483 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 32.4 33.7 52.4 57.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.8 22.8 9.5 10.5 $5,000 to $7,499 29.5 30.7 33.3 26.3 \n$7,500 to $9,999 10.5 10.9 4.8 5.3 \n$10,000 or more 3.8 2.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 25.9 26.9 36.8 46.2 \n$2,500 to $4,999 29.6 26.9 31.6 38.5 $5,000 to $7,499 22.2 23.1 21.1 15.4 \n$7,500 to $9,999 13.6 14.1 10.5 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 8.6 9.0 0.0 0.0 \nAttained credential (among received \ntraining)\n1 66.9 68.2 78.3 76.2 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.5 1.6 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 1.5 1.6 4.3 4.8 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 60.5 60.9 57.1 \nOther 4.4 4.7 13.0 14.3 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 88Table II-34 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters who Received Intensive or Training Services, \nby Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Offender \nNumber of exiters1 174 52 31 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after exit) \n(excludes employed at entry)1 64.4 63.2 52.2 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 80.5 88.5 85.7 \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 $10,617 $8,951 $11,627 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-Month \nOutcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after exit2 85.1 92.3 85.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after exit3 78.9 90.9 72.7 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $3,217 $2,087 $7,791 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $3,695 $2,528 $6,550 \nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 38.5 36.8 \nInformation about Employment in Quarter \nafter exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & technical 11.5 12.5 9.1 \nHealthcare practitioners and technical \noccupations 8.4 6.3 0.0 \nService occupations 24.6 31.3 18.2 \nHealthcare support occup. 8.4 9.4 0.0 \nSales and clerical 11.5 31.3 9.1 Farming, fishing, forestry, construction and \nextraction 4.9 6.3 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 47.5 18.8 63.6 \nNontraditional employment\n1 1.9 0.0 0.0 \nMales 3.9 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 89 With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Offender \nNumber of exiters 174 0 52 0 31 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 67.7 68.8 54.2 \nSecond quarter after exit4 67.8 69.4 61.9 \nThird quarter after exit2 66.9 74.3 57.1 \nFourth quarter after exit3 62.9 80.8 44.4 \nAverage earnings (among with earnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $4,547 $3,211 $3,646 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,879 $4,266 $4,758 \nThird quarter after exit2 $4,898 $4,613 $6,051 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,335 $5,071 $7,331 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 32.4 45.5 38.5 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.8 30.3 30.8 $5,000 to $7,499 29.5 18.2 30.8 $7,500 to $9,999 10.5 6.1 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 3.8 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 25.9 23.1 8.3 \n$2,500 to $4,999 29.6 46.2 25.0 $5,000 to $7,499 22.2 7.7 33.3 $7,500 to $9,999 13.6 11.5 25.0 \n$10,000 or more 8.6 11.5 8.3 \nAttained credential (among received \ntraining)\n1 66.9 59.0 63.2 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.5 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college degree 1.5 0.0 5.3 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 51.3 47.4 \nOther 4.4 7.7 10.5 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 90Table II-35 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters, by Major Service Categories \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \n \nAll Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters1 176 29 145 128 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 63.4 64.7 64.3 62.7 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 80.5 100.0 78.5 79.0 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $10,617 $8,113 $10,940 $11,891 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 85.1 100.0 83.5 85.5 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 78.9 75.0 79.4 78.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $3,217 $6,821 $2,852 $3,164 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $3,695 $6,821 $3,299 $3,822 \nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 48.5 48.3 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 11.5 0.0 13.2 14.3 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 8.4 0.0 9.7 12.7 \nService occupations 24.6 75.0 17.0 21.4 \nHealthcare support occup. 8.4 14.3 7.5 9.9 \nSales and clerical 11.5 12.5 11.3 14.3 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 4.9 0.0 5.7 4.8 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 47.5 12.5 52.8 45.2 \nNontraditional employment\n1 1.9 0.0 2.2 2.5 \nMales 3.9 0.0 4.2 5.3 \nFemales 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 91 \n \nAll Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 176 0 29 145 128 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 66.9 68.4 67.6 65.8 \nSecond quarter after exit4 66.9 70.0 67.5 68.4 \nThird quarter after exit2 66.4 55.6 68.9 70.7 \nFourth quarter after exit3 62.9 56.3 64.2 63.1 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $4,547 $3,156 $4,743 $4,713 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,879 $4,783 $4,895 $5,319 \nThird quarter after exit2 $4,898 $3,926 $5,035 $5,405 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,335 $3,585 $5,638 $6,097 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 32.4 46.2 30.4 32.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.8 23.1 23.9 22.8 $5,000 to $7,499 29.5 30.8 29.3 26.6 $7,500 to $9,999 10.5 0.0 12.0 12.7 \n$10,000 or more 3.8 0.0 4.3 5.1 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 25.9 40.0 23.9 19.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 29.6 30.0 29.6 31.0 $5,000 to $7,499 22.2 10.0 23.9 24.1 $7,500 to $9,999 13.6 20.0 12.7 13.8 \n$10,000 or more 8.6 0.0 9.9 12.1 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 66.9 66.9 68.3 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.5 1.5 0.8 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 1.5 1.5 1.7 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 59.6 65.8 \nOther 4.4 4.4 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 92Table II-36 \nOutcomes of Adult Exiters, by Type of Training \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters1 31 145 18 128 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 57.9 64.3 78.6 62.7 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 100.0 78.5 77.8 79.0 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $8,113 $10,940 $7,301 $11,891 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 100.0 83.5 77.8 85.5 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 75.0 79.4 85.7 78.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $6,821 $2,852 $1,986 $3,164 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $6,821 $3,299 $1,666 $3,822 \nCredential and employment rate1 48.5 52.9 48.3 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 0.0 13.2 8.3 14.3 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 9.7 0.0 12.7 \nService occupations 75.0 17.0 0.0 21.4 \nHealthcare support occup. 14.3 7.5 0.0 9.9 \nSales and clerical 12.5 11.3 0.0 14.3 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 0.0 5.7 8.3 4.8 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 12.5 52.8 83.3 45.2 \nNontraditional employment\n1 0.0 2.2 0.0 2.5 \nMales 0.0 4.2 0.0 5.3 \nFemales 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 93 \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters 31 145 0 18 128 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 61.9 67.6 82.4 65.8 \nSecond quarter after exit4 63.6 67.5 66.7 68.4 \nThird quarter after exit2 52.6 68.9 63.6 70.7 \nFourth quarter after exit3 56.3 64.2 70.6 63.1 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $3,156 $4,743 $4,915 $4,713 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $4,783 $4,895 $3,337 $5,319 \nThird quarter after exit2 $3,926 $5,035 $3,410 $5,405 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $3,585 $5,638 $4,025 $6,097 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 46.2 30.4 14.3 32.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 23.9 35.7 22.8 $5,000 to $7,499 30.8 29.3 42.9 26.6 $7,500 to $9,999 0.0 12.0 7.1 12.7 $10,000 or more 0.0 4.3 0.0 5.1 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 40.0 23.9 42.9 19.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 30.0 29.6 28.6 31.0 $5,000 to $7,499 10.0 23.9 21.4 24.1 $7,500 to $9,999 20.0 12.7 7.1 13.8 $10,000 or more 0.0 9.9 0.0 12.1 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 66.9 58.8 68.3 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.5 5.9 0.8 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 1.5 0.0 1.7 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 59.6 17.6 65.8 \nOther 4.4 35.3 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 94Table II-37 \nPerformance Outcomes of Adult Exiters, by Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof Exiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof Exiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nAll Exiters 176 63.4 48.5 142 80.5 10,617 \nStatewide programs Local programs 176 63.4 48.5 142 80.5 10,617 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \n18 to 21 13 70.0 70.0 14 100.0 9,398 \n22 to 29 37 61.5 48.3 30 68.4 10,296 30 to 44 77 57.1 41.8 65 87.5 11,173 \n45 to 54 35 79.3 55.2 26 70.6 10,322 \n55 and over 14 53.8 46.2 \nGender \nFemale 83 67.2 45.8 68 86.0 8,817 \nMale 93 60.0 50.6 74 75.0 12,636 \nIndividual with a disability 40 58.6 43.3 37 85.7 9,522 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic \nNot Hispanic American Indian or \n Alaskan Native (only) \n Asian (only) \n Black or African \n American (only) \n Hawaiian or other \n Pacific Islander (only) \n White (only) 166 63.8 48.5 131 81.0 10,539 \n More than one race \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 11 62.5 62.5 13 71.4 11,503 \nDisabled veteran Campaign veteran \nRecently separated veteran \nOther eligible person Vermont Adults \nSocial Policy Research Associates 95 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof Exiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof Exiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nAll exiters 176 63.4 48.5 142 80.5 10,617 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 23 47.6 20 94.1 12,725 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 153 63.4 48.7 122 77.1 9,993 \nPreprogram quarterly \nearnings \nNone 50 54.3 39.4 43 84.2 13,217 \n$1 to $2,499 41 59.3 48.4 34 90.0 7,519 \n$2,500 to $4,999 42 71.9 53.1 41 77.4 9,909 $5,000 to $7,499 21 73.7 47.4 15 75.0 12,767 $7,500 to $9,999 12 45.5 36.4 $10,000 or more 10 80.0 80.0 \n \nCharacteristics of Exiters \nwho Received Intensive or \nTraining Services With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language \nproficiency \nSingle parent 52 63.2 38.5 42 88.5 8,951 \nUI status \nClaimant 16 83.3 61.5 11 66.7 6,933 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS \nExhaustee \nLow income 167 65.4 49.6 136 80.7 10,712 \nPublic assistance recipient 32 72.0 56.5 33 100.0 8,769 \nTANF recipient 30 70.8 52.4 27 100.0 7,417 \nOther public assistance 11 100.0 11,729 \nHomeless \nOffender 31 52.2 36.8 28 85.7 11,627 \nHighest grade completed \n8th or less \nSome high school 17 73.3 75.0 22 93.3 9,159 \nHigh school graduate 87 57.4 50.7 64 76.9 9,817 \nHigh school equivalency 15 70.0 50.0 12 50.0 12,132 Some postsecondary 38 76.7 37.5 25 93.3 11,450 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 17 55.6 38.5 16 75.0 13,752 Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 96Table II-38 \nPerformance Outcomes of Adult Exiters, by Services Received \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof \nExiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNumber of exiters 176 63.4 48.5 142 80.5 10,617 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated worker \nWIA youth Partner program 45 78.1 58.8 41 81.5 9,006 \nWagner-Peyser 45 78.1 58.8 41 81.5 9,006 \nTAA National Farmworker Jobs Veterans programs Vocational Education Adult Education \nTitle V Older Worker \nOther partner programs \nServices Received \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities \nStaff-assisted core services 176 63.4 48.5 142 80.5 10,617 \nWorkforce information \nIntensive Services 174 64.4 48.5 140 80.5 10,617 \nPrevocational activities \nTraining services 145 64.3 48.5 113 78.5 10,940 \nOn-the-job training 18 78.6 52.9 24 77.8 7,301 Skill upgrading & \nretraining \nEntrepreneurial training \nABE or ESL in \ncombination with training \nCustomized training \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 128 62.7 48.3 90 79.0 11,891 \nNeeds-related payments \nOther supportive services 113 59.5 47.6 79 86.4 12,706 \nPell Grant recipient Vermont Adults \n Social Policy Research Associates 97 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof \nExiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNumber of exiters 176 63.4 48.5 142 80.5 10,617 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only \nIntensive & core services only 29 64.7 27 100.0 8,113 \nTraining services 145 64.3 48.5 113 78.5 10,940 \nITA established 128 62.7 48.3 90 79.0 11,891 \nWeeks participated \n13 or fewer weeks 53 52.9 37.5 48 73.1 11,564 \n14 to 26 weeks 57 63.6 46.2 42 78.6 8,644 27 to 39 weeks 31 76.5 61.9 27 81.3 9,832 40 to 52 weeks 12 62.5 55.6 More than 52 weeks 23 85.7 63.2 17 92.9 14,550 \nWeeks of training \n13 or fewer weeks 67 52.5 36.5 53 73.5 11,497 \n14 to 26 weeks 35 70.4 58.1 34 80.0 8,081 27 to 39 weeks 22 87.5 61.9 11 66.7 7,815 \n40 to 52 weeks \nMore than 52 weeks 16 77.8 50.0 9 88.9 18,924 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical \nService occupations \nSales and clerical \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction \nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, \nmaterial moving 13 83.3 58.3 22 77.8 7,301 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized \nHealth/medical 13 14 Deceased Family care Reserve called to active duty \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program \nRetirement Adults Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 98Table II-39 \nPerformance Outcomes of Adult Exiters, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number of \nExiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention 2nd \nand 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNation 1,092,642 54.2 51.1 962,610 77.9 13,680 \nAlabama 1,684 60.9 38.6 1,926 78.3 11,374 \nAlaska 386 73.6 56.8 457 78.8 15,862 Arizona 3,066 69.6 66.1 3,953 83.2 12,246 Arkansas 976 87.5 78.8 803 95.4 13,580 California 81,179 49.4 33.9 63,938 81.6 13,240 \nColorado 2,349 76.5 37.5 2,678 81.1 14,399 \nConnecticut 1,074 62.0 52.0 671 86.0 11,522 Delaware 442 73.5 56.0 413 81.2 9,953 District of Columbia 503 57.9 36.3 601 69.5 12,415 Florida 18,693 79.8 86.5 16,305 89.0 21,103 \nGeorgia 2,610 70.8 62.0 2,856 82.5 12,056 \nHawaii 183 60.4 66.7 280 86.7 12,626 Idaho 467 77.7 54.5 431 83.2 11,972 Illinois 3,671 72.2 52.0 4,590 79.6 11,741 Indiana 132,500 47.8 36.3 105,162 75.5 10,506 Iowa 1,963 60.3 61.5 528 92.8 12,419 \nKansas 5,011 60.2 20.0 1,851 88.6 14,997 \nKentucky 3,638 81.5 50.9 3,419 89.9 17,258 Louisiana 124,087 56.7 48.3 116,073 74.3 12,350 Maine 366 77.5 66.4 352 85.9 9,472 Maryland 1,635 77.2 73.6 1,657 87.0 14,784 \nMassachusetts 1,929 74. 8 72.3 1,865 77.0 10,760 \nMichigan 6,541 86.9 85.0 6,265 87.4 11,043 Minnesota 1,299 82.9 75.9 1,268 84.8 14,669 Mississippi 20,156 56.9 53.1 25,469 77.8 11,045 Missouri 3,037 72.5 19.1 3,214 81.4 11,117 Montana 304 82.5 5.3 287 85.8 11,775 \nNebraska 493 77.5 52.2 473 85.1 9,651 \nNevada 1,288 65.4 38.8 1,093 72.0 10,720 New Hampshire 419 74.7 77.3 381 79.7 9,231 New Jersey 2,083 86.0 63.4 2,540 83.0 11,947 New Mexico 3,024 57.4 56.3 1,447 84.7 15,741 \nNew York 339,109 55.1 32.8 330,426 76.5 15,343 Vermont Adults \n Social Policy Research Associates 99 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number of \nExiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention 2nd \nand 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNorth Carolina 2,585 65.3 48.7 2,599 84.7 11,715 \nNorth Dakota 770 75.4 12.0 618 77.1 10,903 Ohio 8,202 64.1 55.2 8,833 81.6 14,523 Oklahoma 56,078 50.3 44.1 49,682 76.8 11,699 \nOregon 104,788 43.6 18.0 40,278 75.5 12,707 \nPennsylvania 4,575 69.5 56.4 4,731 79.9 11,122 Puerto Rico 5,318 67.1 36.4 6,093 73.5 9,285 Rhode Island 666 58.0 45.5 803 83.6 10,674 South Carolina 10,393 56.8 35.2 8,507 81.3 11,024 South Dakota 696 75.7 52.5 890 81.5 10,644 \nTennessee 7,485 72.0 59.1 8,395 84.5 13,753 \nTexas 20,843 66.1 53.7 23,742 83.7 18,587 Utah 96,846 56.4 11.4 96,435 78.6 13,049 Vermont 176 63.4 48.5 142 80.5 10,617 Virgin Islands 230 45.3 13.8 198 72.4 9,830 \nVirginia 1,518 71.4 53.2 1,637 82.5 10,402 \nWashington 2,631 75.9 59.1 2,611 82.7 14,453 West Virginia 608 70.4 65.5 846 82.6 10,627 Wisconsin 1,732 67.2 51.1 1,673 80.2 10,642 Wyoming 337 78.5 65.2 225 86.2 13,218 \n \n Social Policy Research Associates 101 \n \nPart III \nDislocated Worker Exiters \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 102Table III-1 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Characteristics, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146\nStatewide programs 11,876 15,337 20,370 0 0 0Local programs 228,635 340,197 510,455 108 129 146National Emergency Grants 10,858 13,948 19,612 0 0 0\nDisaster Relief 3,563 4,387 5,137 \nOther 7,295 9,561 14,475 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 3.2 3.5 3.7 0.9 1.6 0.7 \n22 to 29 16.2 17.3 17.5 10.2 9.3 7.5 \n30 to 44 37.2 36.4 35.7 39.8 33.3 30.1 45 to 54 27.3 25.9 26.1 31.5 29.5 38.4 55 and over 16.1 16.8 17.0 17.6 26.4 23.3 \nGender \nFemale 51.0 48.1 45.4 40.7 45.0 34.9 \nMale 49.0 51.9 54.6 59.3 55.0 65.1 \nIndividual with a disability 3.7 3.0 2.8 7.4 11.6 13.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 13.5 15.3 15.5 1.9 1.6 0.7 Not Hispanic \n American Indian or \n Alaskan Native (only) 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.9 0.0 1.4 \n Asian (only) 3.5 4.5 4.2 0.9 0.0 2.1 \n Black or African \n American (only) 26.4 21.8 18.1 0.9 2.3 1.4 \n Hawaiian or other \n Pacific Islander (only) 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \n White (only) 54.4 55.6 59.1 94.4 96.1 94.5 \n More than one race 1.4 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 8.3 7.3 7.7 10.2 16.3 16.4 \nDisabled veteran 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.0 1.6 1.4 \nCampaign veteran 2.5 1.7 1.7 3.8 10.2 5.5 Recently separated veteran 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.7 Other eligible person 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 103 Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146\nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.8 4.6 5.1 13.0 7.8 5.5 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 94.2 95.4 94.9 87.0 92.2 94.5 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $8,951 $10,201 $10,058 $8,048 $8,480 $9,787\nNone 12.2 12.2 12.8 9.3 3.1 1.6 \n$1 to $2,499 11.9 10.9 11.0 5.6 7.0 4.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.7 17.2 16.5 15.7 16.3 11.9 \n$5,000 to $7,499 19.0 17.9 17.0 22.2 20.2 20.6 $7,500 to $9,999 14.1 13.9 13.5 21.3 26.4 23.0 $10,000 or more 24.1 28.0 29.1 25.9 27.1 38.9 \nDisplaced homemaker 1.9 2.7 4.1 0.9 0.8 0.7 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 8.4 8.5 7.0 6.5 8.5 7.5 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 38.2 41.1 39.2 39.8 46.5 39.7 Over 8 weeks after layoff 53.4 50.4 53.8 53.7 45.0 52.7 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 5.6 3.6 2.9 0.0 0.8 1.4 \nSingle parent 12.0 9.9 8.5 9.3 8.5 8.2 \nUI Status \nClaimant 67.6 65.4 66.4 6.5 15.5 21.2 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 24.3 24.8 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 9.2 6.7 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.7 12.7 12.8 12.8 12.7 13.3 \n8th or less 2.9 2.6 2.5 0.9 1.6 1.4 \nSome high school 8.8 9.3 10.2 5.6 8.5 6.2 \nHigh school graduate 43.1 41.8 39.3 58.3 48.1 36.3 \nHigh school equivalency 6.0 6.3 6.7 1.9 6.2 2.7 \nSome postsecondary 26.7 26.2 26.0 17.6 23.3 31.5 College graduate (4-year) 12.6 13.8 15.3 15.7 12.4 21.9 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 104Table III-2 \nNumber of Dislocated Worker Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146 \nStatewide programs 11,876 15,337 20,370 0 0 0 Local programs 228,635 340,197 510,455 108 129 146 National Emergency Grants 10,858 13,948 19,612 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief 3,563 4,387 5,137 \nOther 7,295 9,561 14,475 \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 7,834 12,530 19,688 1 2 1 \n22 to 29 39,226 61,886 93,156 11 12 11 \n30 to 44 90,102 130,030 189,751 43 43 44 45 to 54 66,078 92,541 138,657 34 38 56 55 and over 38,919 60,126 90,357 19 34 34 \nGender \nFemale 123,436 171,672 241,023 44 58 51 \nMale 118,631 185,366 290,396 64 71 95 \nIndividual with a disability 8,571 10,324 14,600 8 15 19 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 30,772 50,939 77,732 2 2 1 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1,267 2,451 5,217 2 0 2 \nAsian (only) 7,965 14,874 21,177 1 0 3 \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) 60,104 72,576 90,722 1 3 2 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 545 1,007 1,553 0 0 0 \nWhite (only) 123,747 185,306 297,131 102 124 138 \nMore than one race 3,095 5,866 8,856 0 0 0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 20,170 25,951 40,865 11 21 24 \nDisabled veteran 2,819 3,038 4,483 0 2 2 \nCampaign veteran 5,936 6,020 8,916 4 13 8 Recently separated veteran 3,110 3,697 5,384 1 1 1 Other eligible person 298 521 959 0 0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 105 Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 13,968 16,254 26,906 14 10 8 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 228,204 340,862 504,704 94 119 138 \nAverage preprogram \nquarterly earnings \nNone 29,531 43,418 47,851 10 4 2 \n$1 to $2,499 28,679 38,740 41,145 6 9 5 \n$2,500 to $4,999 45,098 61,328 61,577 17 21 15 \n$5,000 to $7,499 45,910 64,005 63,252 24 26 26 $7,500 to $9,999 34,106 49,471 50,201 23 34 29 $10,000 or more 58,358 99,848 108,439 28 35 49 \nDisplaced homemaker 4,560 9,568 21,638 1 1 1 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 10,769 15,263 21,118 7 11 11 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 49,018 73,814 117,740 43 60 58 Over 8 weeks after layoff 68,589 90,462 161,698 58 58 77 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or \nTraining Services \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 7,042 5,400 6,858 0 1 2 \nSingle parent 15,005 14,635 19,806 10 11 12 \nUI Status \nClaimant 86,089 98,490 156,861 7 20 31 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 30,971 37,357 54,334 0 0 0 \nExhaustee 11,680 10,102 10,823 0 0 0 \nHighest grade completed \n(avg.) \n8th or less 3,713 3,771 5,709 1 2 2 \nSome high school 11,184 13,639 23,157 6 11 9 \nHigh school graduate 54,665 61,239 88,978 63 62 53 \nHigh school equivalency 7,587 9,232 15,081 2 8 4 Some postsecondary 33,821 38,394 58,888 19 30 46 College graduate (4-year) 15,936 20,243 34,659 17 16 32 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 106Table III-3 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Funding Source \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Formula Funds \n All Exiters All Local Statewide NEG \nNumber of exiters 146 146 146 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 Local programs 146 146 146 National Emergency Grants 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.7 0.7 \n22 to 29 7.5 7.5 7.5 30 to 44 30.1 30.1 30.1 45 to 54 38.4 38.4 38.4 55 and over 23.3 23.3 23.3 \nGender \nFemale 34.9 34.9 34.9 \nMale 65.1 65.1 65.1 \nIndividual with a disability 13.0 13.0 13.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 0.7 0.7 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.4 1.4 1.4 \nAsian (only) 2.1 2.1 2.1 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 1.4 1.4 1.4 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 94.5 94.5 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.4 16.4 16.4 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 1.4 1.4 Campaign veteran 5.5 5.5 5.5 Recently separated veteran 0.7 0.7 0.7 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 107 Formula Funds \n All Exiters All Local Statewide NEG \nNumber of exiters 146 146 146 0 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 5.5 5.5 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 94.5 94.5 94.5 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,787 $9,787 $9,787 \nNone 1.6 1.6 1.6 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 4.0 4.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.9 11.9 11.9 $5,000 to $7,499 20.6 20.6 20.6 $7,500 to $9,999 23.0 23.0 23.0 $10,000 or more 38.9 38.9 38.9 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 0.7 0.7 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 7.5 7.5 7.5 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 39.7 39.7 39.7 Over 8 weeks after layoff 52.7 52.7 52.7 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \nWith \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 1.4 1.4 1.4 \nSingle parent 8.2 8.2 8.2 \nUI Status \nClaimant 21.2 21.2 21.2 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 13.3 13.3 \n8th or less 1.4 1.4 1.4 \nSome high school 6.2 6.2 6.2 \nHigh school graduate 36.3 36.3 36.3 \nHigh school equivalency 2.7 2.7 2.7 Some postsecondary 31.5 31.5 31.5 College graduate (4-year) 21.9 21.9 21.9 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 108Table III-4 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Type of NEG Project \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \nAll Exiters Formula \nFunds NEG \n All Disaster Relief Other \nNumber of exiters 146 146 \nStatewide programs 0 0 \nLocal programs 146 146 National Emergency Grants 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.7 \n22 to 29 7.5 7.5 \n30 to 44 30.1 30.1 45 to 54 38.4 38.4 55 and over 23.3 23.3 \nGender \nFemale 34.9 34.9 \nMale 65.1 65.1 \nIndividual with a disability 13.0 13.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 0.7 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.4 1.4 \nAsian (only) 2.1 2.1 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 1.4 1.4 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 94.5 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.4 16.4 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 1.4 \nCampaign veteran 5.5 5.5 Recently separated veteran 0.7 0.7 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 109 \nAll Exiters Formula \nFunds NEG \n All Disaster Relief Other \nNumber of exiters 146 146 0 0 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 5.5 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 94.5 94.5 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,787 $9,787 \nNone 1.6 1.6 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 4.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.9 11.9 $5,000 to $7,499 20.6 20.6 $7,500 to $9,999 23.0 23.0 $10,000 or more 38.9 38.9 \nDisplaced homemaker \nTime of participation 0.7 0.7 \nBefore layoff 7.5 7.5 Within 8 weeks of layoff 39.7 39.7 Over 8 weeks after layoff 52.7 52.7 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 1.4 1.4 \nSingle parent 8.2 8.2 \nUI Status \nClaimant 21.2 21.2 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 13.3 \n8th or less 1.4 1.4 \nSome high school 6.2 6.2 \nHigh school graduate 36.3 36.3 \nHigh school equivalency 2.7 2.7 \nSome postsecondary 31.5 31.5 College graduate (4-year) 21.9 21.9 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 110Table III-5 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Age at Participation \n Under 22 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 11 44 56 34 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 Local programs 11 44 56 34 National Emergency Grants 0 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \n22 to 29 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \n30 to 44 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 45 to 54 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 \n55 and over 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 \nGender \nFemale 18.2 43.2 37.5 26.5 \nMale 81.8 56.8 62.5 73.5 \nIndividual with a disability 9.1 9.1 12.5 20.6 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.0 4.5 1.8 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 9.1 2.3 0.0 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 90.9 90.9 94.6 100.0 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 0.0 9.1 21.4 23.5 \nDisabled veteran 0.0 0.0 1.8 2.9 \nCampaign veteran 0.0 4.5 5.4 8.8 Recently separated veteran 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 111 Age at Participation \n Under 22 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 0 11 44 56 34 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 0.0 13.6 1.8 2.9 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 100.0 86.4 98.2 97.1 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $7,691 $9,544 $9,760 $11,063 \nNone 0.0 0.0 2.0 3.6 \n$1 to $2,499 0.0 7.9 2.0 3.6 \n$2,500 to $4,999 20.0 13.2 10.2 10.7 $5,000 to $7,499 30.0 15.8 22.4 17.9 $7,500 to $9,999 40.0 21.1 22.4 21.4 $10,000 or more 10.0 42.1 40.8 42.9 \nDisplaced homemaker 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 0.0 18.2 3.6 2.9 Within 8 weeks of layoff 45.5 38.6 44.6 32.4 Over 8 weeks after layoff 54.5 43.2 51.8 64.7 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 9.1 2.3 0.0 0.0 \nSingle parent 18.2 18.2 3.6 0.0 \nUI Status \nClaimant 18.2 27.3 23.2 11.8 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 12.5 13.6 13.3 13.3 \n8th or less 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.9 \nSome high school 0.0 4.5 8.9 5.9 \nHigh school graduate 54.5 27.3 37.5 38.2 \nHigh school equivalency 9.1 0.0 5.4 0.0 Some postsecondary 36.4 38.6 28.6 26.5 College graduate (4-year) 0.0 27.3 19.6 26.5 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 112Table III-6 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 145 138 \nStatewide programs 0 0 Local programs 145 138 National Emergency Grants 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.7 \n22 to 29 7.6 7.2 \n30 to 44 29.7 29.0 45 to 54 38.6 38.4 55 and over 23.4 24.6 \nGender \nFemale 34.5 34.8 \nMale 65.5 65.2 \nIndividual with a disability 13.1 13.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.0 0.0 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.4 0.0 \nAsian (only) 2.1 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 1.4 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 95.2 100.0 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.6 16.7 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 1.4 \nCampaign veteran 5.5 5.1 Recently separated veteran 0.7 0.7 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 113 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 0 145 0 138 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 5.8 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 94.5 94.2 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,695 $9,505 \nNone 1.6 1.7 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 4.2 \n$2,500 to $4,999 12.0 11.9 $5,000 to $7,499 20.8 21.2 $7,500 to $9,999 23.2 23.7 $10,000 or more 38.4 37.3 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 0.7 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 7.6 8.0 Within 8 weeks of layoff 39.3 38.4 Over 8 weeks after layoff 53.1 53.6 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 1.4 0.7 \nSingle parent 7.6 7.2 \nUI Status \nClaimant 20.7 19.6 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 13.2 \n8th or less 1.4 1.4 \nSome high school 6.2 6.5 \nHigh school graduate 36.6 37.7 \nHigh school equivalency 2.8 2.9 Some postsecondary 31.7 32.6 College graduate (4-year) 21.4 18.8 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 114Table III-7 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation, Gender, and Disability \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Employed at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters 138 95 51 19 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 138 95 51 19 \nNational Emergency Grants 0 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief Other \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 \n22 to 29 8.0 9.5 3.9 5.3 30 to 44 27.5 26.3 37.3 21.1 45 to 54 39.9 36.8 41.2 36.8 \n55 and over 23.9 26.3 17.6 36.8 \nGender \nFemale 34.1 0.0 100.0 0.0 \nMale 65.9 100.0 0.0 100.0 \nIndividual with a disability 13.8 20.0 0.0 100.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 0.0 2.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 1.4 1.1 2.0 5.3 \nAsian (only) 2.2 3.2 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American (only) 1.4 1.1 2.0 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.2 94.7 94.1 94.7 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 15.9 23.2 3.9 42.1 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 2.1 0.0 5.3 Campaign veteran 5.8 7.4 2.0 10.5 Recently separated veteran 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 115 Employed at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters 0 138 95 51 19 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 0.0 4.2 7.8 0.0 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 100.0 95.8 92.2 100.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,817 $10,046 $9,318 $7,362 \nNone 1.7 1.2 2.2 0.0 \n$1 to $2,499 4.1 3.7 4.4 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 10.7 13.6 8.9 31.3 $5,000 to $7,499 20.7 18.5 24.4 25.0 $7,500 to $9,999 24.0 21.0 26.7 25.0 $10,000 or more 38.8 42.0 33.3 18.8 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 3.6 6.3 9.8 5.3 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 41.3 38.9 41.2 31.6 Over 8 weeks after layoff 55.1 54.7 49.0 63.2 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language proficiency 1.4 2.1 0.0 0.0 \nSingle parent 7.2 3.2 17.6 0.0 \nUI Status \nClaimant 22.5 22.1 19.6 15.8 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 13.1 13.6 12.3 \n8th or less 1.4 2.1 0.0 10.5 \nSome high school 5.8 6.3 5.9 5.3 \nHigh school graduate 37.0 36.8 35.3 47.4 \nHigh school equivalency 2.9 3.2 2.0 0.0 \nSome postsecondary 31.2 35.8 23.5 31.6 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 21.7 15.8 33.3 5.3 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 116Table III-8 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Veteran Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n All Exiters Eligible \nVeteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 146 24 \nStatewide programs 0 0 Local programs 146 24 National Emergency Grants 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.0 \n22 to 29 7.5 0.0 30 to 44 30.1 16.7 45 to 54 38.4 50.0 55 and over 23.3 33.3 \nGender \nFemale 34.9 8.3 \nMale 65.1 91.7 \nIndividual with a disability 13.0 33.3 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 1.4 4.2 \nAsian (only) 2.1 0.0 \nBlack or African American (only) 1.4 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 95.8 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.4 100.0 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 8.3 \nCampaign veteran 5.5 33.3 Recently separated veteran 0.7 4.2 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 117 All Exiters Eligible \nVeteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 146 24 0 0 0\nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 8.3 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 94.5 91.7 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,787 $9,267 \nNone 1.6 0.0 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 10.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.9 25.0 \n$5,000 to $7,499 20.6 30.0 $7,500 to $9,999 23.0 5.0 $10,000 or more 38.9 30.0 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 0.0 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 7.5 8.3 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 39.7 41.7 Over 8 weeks after layoff 52.7 50.0 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language proficiency 1.4 0.0 \nSingle parent 8.2 4.2 \nUI Status \nClaimant 21.2 20.8 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 12.7 \n8th or less 1.4 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 0.0 \nHigh school graduate 36.3 58.3 \nHigh school equivalency 2.7 8.3 \nSome postsecondary 31.5 29.2 College graduate (4-year) 21.9 4.2 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 118Table III-9 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool High \nSchool \nGraduate Some \nPost-\nsecondary College \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 146 11 57 46 32\nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0Local programs 146 11 57 46 32National Emergency Grants 0 0 0 0 0\nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 \n22 to 29 7.5 0.0 12.3 8.7 0.0 30 to 44 30.1 27.3 21.1 37.0 37.5 45 to 54 38.4 45.5 42.1 34.8 34.4 55 and over 23.3 27.3 22.8 19.6 28.1 \nGender \nFemale 34.9 27.3 33.3 26.1 53.1 \nMale 65.1 72.7 66.7 73.9 46.9 \nIndividual with a disability 13.0 27.3 15.8 13.0 3.1 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 1.4 0.0 1.8 0.0 3.1 \nAsian (only) 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 \nBlack or African American (only) 1.4 0.0 0.0 2.2 3.1 \nHawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 100.0 98.2 97.8 81.3 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.4 0.0 28.1 15.2 3.1 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 Campaign veteran 5.5 0.0 8.8 6.5 0.0 Recently separated veteran 0.7 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 119 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool High \nSchool \nGraduate Some \nPost-\nsecondary College \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 146 11 57 46 32\nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 9.1 3.5 6.5 6.3 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 94.5 90.9 96.5 93.5 93.8 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,787 $8,033 $8,751 $9,540 $12,726\nNone 1.6 0.0 2.1 2.4 0.0 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 0.0 6.3 4.8 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.9 10.0 14.6 14.3 3.8 \n$5,000 to $7,499 20.6 30.0 27.1 14.3 15.4 $7,500 to $9,999 23.0 50.0 27.1 16.7 15.4 $10,000 or more 38.9 10.0 22.9 47.6 65.4 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 7.5 9.1 5.3 10.9 6.3 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 39.7 36.4 38.6 45.7 34.4 Over 8 weeks after layoff 52.7 54.5 56.1 43.5 59.4 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language proficiency 1.4 0.0 1.8 0.0 3.1 \nSingle parent 8.2 0.0 5.3 15.2 6.3 \nUI Status \nClaimant 21.2 9.1 22.8 23.9 18.8 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 9.7 12.0 13.8 16.1 \n8th or less 1.4 18.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 81.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHigh school graduate 36.3 0.0 93.0 0.0 0.0 \nHigh school equivalency 2.7 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 Some postsecondary 31.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 21.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 120Table III-10 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by UI Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \nUI \nExhaustee All Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS \nNumber of exiters 146 31 31 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 Local programs 146 31 31 National Emergency Grants 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.0 0.0 22 to 29 7.5 6.5 6.5 30 to 44 30.1 38.7 38.7 \n45 to 54 38.4 41.9 41.9 \n55 and over 23.3 12.9 12.9 \nGender \nFemale 34.9 32.3 32.3 Male 65.1 67.7 67.7 \nIndividual with a disability 13.0 9.7 9.7 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 3.2 3.2 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 1.4 3.2 3.2 \nAsian (only) 2.1 3.2 3.2 \nBlack or African American (only) 1.4 3.2 3.2 Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 87.1 87.1 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.4 16.1 16.1 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 0.0 0.0 \nCampaign veteran 5.5 9.7 9.7 \nRecently separated veteran 0.7 0.0 0.0 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 121 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \nUI \nExhaustee All Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS \nNumber of exiters 146 31 0 31 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 0.0 0.0 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 94.5 100.0 100.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,787 $10,482 $10,482 \nNone 1.6 0.0 0.0 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 0.0 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.9 10.3 10.3 \n$5,000 to $7,499 20.6 17.2 17.2 $7,500 to $9,999 23.0 31.0 31.0 $10,000 or more 38.9 41.4 41.4 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 3.2 3.2 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 7.5 9.7 9.7 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 39.7 54.8 54.8 Over 8 weeks after layoff 52.7 35.5 35.5 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language proficiency 1.4 3.2 3.2 \nSingle parent 8.2 6.5 6.5 \nUI Status \nClaimant 21.2 100.0 100.0 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 13.5 13.5 \n8th or less 1.4 0.0 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 3.2 3.2 \nHigh school graduate 36.3 38.7 38.7 \nHigh school equivalency 2.7 3.2 3.2 Some postsecondary 31.5 35.5 35.5 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 21.9 19.4 19.4 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 122Table III-11 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient \nNumber of exiters 146 12 \nStatewide programs 0 0 Local programs 146 12 National Emergency Grants 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.0 \n22 to 29 7.5 16.7 30 to 44 30.1 66.7 45 to 54 38.4 16.7 \n55 and over 23.3 0.0 \nGender \nFemale 34.9 75.0 \nMale 65.1 25.0 \nIndividual with a disability 13.0 0.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 8.3 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 1.4 0.0 \nAsian (only) 2.1 0.0 \nBlack or African American (only) 1.4 8.3 \nHawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 83.3 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.4 8.3 \nDisabled veteran 1.4 0.0 Campaign veteran 5.5 8.3 Recently separated veteran 0.7 0.0 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 123 With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient \nNumber of exiters 146 0 12 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 16.7 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 94.5 83.3 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,787 $9,416 \nNone 1.6 0.0 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 8.3 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.9 8.3 $5,000 to $7,499 20.6 16.7 $7,500 to $9,999 23.0 41.7 $10,000 or more 38.9 25.0 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 0.0 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 7.5 16.7 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 39.7 66.7 Over 8 weeks after layoff 52.7 16.7 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices \n \nLimited English-language proficiency 1.4 0.0 \nSingle parent 8.2 100.0 \nUI Status \nClaimant 21.2 16.7 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 13.6 \n8th or less 1.4 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 0.0 \nHigh school graduate 36.3 16.7 \nHigh school equivalency 2.7 8.3 \nSome postsecondary 31.5 58.3 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 21.9 16.7 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 124Table III-12 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from Ap ril 2009 to March 2010, by Major Service Categories \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n All Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only Training ITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 146 23 123 116 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 146 23 123 116 \nNational Emergency Grants 0 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.9 \n22 to 29 7.5 4.3 8.1 8.6 30 to 44 30.1 26.1 30.9 29.3 \n45 to 54 38.4 39.1 38.2 37.9 \n55 and over 23.3 30.4 22.0 23.3 \nGender \nFemale 34.9 26.1 36.6 37.1 \nMale 65.1 73.9 63.4 62.9 \nIndividual with a disability 13.0 30.4 9.8 9.5 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.9 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 1.4 4.3 0.8 0.0 \nAsian (only) 2.1 4.3 1.6 0.9 \nBlack or African American (only) 1.4 0.0 1.6 1.7 Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 91.3 95.1 96.6 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 16.4 21.7 15.4 16.4 Disabled veteran 1.4 0.0 1.6 1.7 Campaign veteran 5.5 8.7 4.9 5.2 Recently separated veteran 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.9 \nOther eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 125 All Exiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only Training ITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 146 0 23 123 116 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 5.5 17.4 3.3 3.4 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 94.5 82.6 96.7 96.6 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $9,787 $10,835 $9,609 $9,446 \nNone 1.6 0.0 1.9 2.0 \n$1 to $2,499 4.0 0.0 4.6 5.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.9 5.6 13.0 13.9 \n$5,000 to $7,499 20.6 22.2 20.4 20.8 $7,500 to $9,999 23.0 16.7 24.1 24.8 $10,000 or more 38.9 55.6 36.1 33.7 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.9 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 7.5 13.0 6.5 6.9 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 39.7 43.5 39.0 37.9 Over 8 weeks after layoff 52.7 43.5 54.5 55.2 \n \n \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices With \nIntensive \nor \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language proficiency 1.4 4.3 0.8 0.9 \nSingle parent 8.2 8.7 8.1 8.2 \nUI Status \nClaimant 21.2 13.0 22.8 21.6 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.3 13.1 13.3 13.3 \n8th or less 1.4 4.3 0.8 0.0 \nSome high school 6.2 8.7 5.7 6.0 \nHigh school graduate 36.3 34.8 36.6 38.8 \nHigh school equivalency 2.7 0.0 3.3 3.4 \nSome postsecondary 31.5 30.4 31.7 32.8 College graduate (4-year) 21.9 21.7 22.0 19.0 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 126Table III-13 \nNumber of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 with Specific Characteristics, \nby Major Service Categories \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n All \nExiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only Training ITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 146 23 123 116 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 146 23 123 116 \nNational Emergency Grants 0 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief \nOther \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \nAge categories \nUnder 22 1 0 1 1 \n22 to 29 11 1 10 10 30 to 44 44 6 38 34 45 to 54 56 9 47 44 55 and over 34 7 27 27 \nGender \nFemale 51 6 45 43 \nMale 95 17 78 73 \nIndividual with a disability 19 7 12 11 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 1 0 1 1 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan Native \n(only) 2 1 1 0 \nAsian (only) 3 1 2 1 \nBlack or African American (only) 2 0 2 2 \nHawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0 0 0 0 \nWhite (only) 138 21 117 112 \nMore than one race 0 0 0 0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 24 5 19 19 \nDisabled veteran 2 0 2 2 Campaign veteran 8 2 6 6 Recently separated veteran 1 0 1 1 Other eligible person 0 0 0 0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 127 All \nExiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only Training ITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 146 0 23 123 116 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 8 4 4 4 \nNot employed or received layoff notice 138 19 119 112 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings \nNone 2 0 2 2 \n$1 to $2,499 5 0 5 5 $2,500 to $4,999 15 1 14 14 \n$5,000 to $7,499 26 4 22 21 \n$7,500 to $9,999 29 3 26 25 $10,000 or more 49 10 39 34 \nDisplaced homemaker 1 0 1 1 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 11 3 8 8 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 58 10 48 44 \nOver 8 weeks after layoff 77 10 67 64 \n \n \nCharacteristics of Exiters who Received \nIntensive or Training Services With \nIntensive \nor \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language proficiency 2 1 1 1 \nSingle parent 12 2 10 10 \nUI Status \nClaimant 31 3 28 25 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0 0 0 0 \nExhaustee 0 0 0 0 \nHighest grade completed \n8th or less 2 1 1 0 \nSome high school 9 2 7 7 \nHigh school graduate 53 8 45 45 \nHigh school equivalency 4 0 4 4 \nSome postsecondary 46 7 39 38 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 32 5 27 22 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 128Table III-14 \nCharacteristics of Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Type of Training \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters 23 123 116 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 23 123 116 National Emergency Grants 0 0 0 \nDisaster Relief O t h e r \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \n \nAge categories \nUnder 22 0.0 0.8 0.9 \n22 to 29 4.3 8.1 8.6 \n30 to 44 26.1 30.9 29.3 \n45 to 54 39.1 38.2 37.9 55 and over 30.4 22.0 23.3 \nGender \nFemale 26.1 36.6 37.1 \nMale 73.9 63.4 62.9 \nIndividual with a disability 30.4 9.8 9.5 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.0 0.8 0.9 Not Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 4.3 0.8 0.0 \nAsian (only) 4.3 1.6 0.9 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 0.0 1.6 1.7 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 91.3 95.1 96.6 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 21.7 15.4 16.4 Disabled veteran 0.0 1.6 1.7 \nCampaign veteran 8.7 4.9 5.2 \nRecently separated veteran 0.0 0.8 0.9 Other eligible person 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 129 \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters 23 123 0 0 116 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 17.4 3.3 3.4 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 82.6 96.7 96.6 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings $10,835 $9,609 $9,446 \nNone 0.0 1.9 2.0 \n$1 to $2,499 0.0 4.6 5.0 $2,500 to $4,999 5.6 13.0 13.9 \n$5,000 to $7,499 22.2 20.4 20.8 \n$7,500 to $9,999 16.7 24.1 24.8 $10,000 or more 55.6 36.1 33.7 \nDisplaced homemaker 0.0 0.8 0.9 \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 13.0 6.5 6.9 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 43.5 39.0 37.9 \nOver 8 weeks after layoff 43.5 54.5 55.2 \nCharacteristics of Exiters who \nReceived Intensive or Training \nServices Intensive \nServices, No \nTraining \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 4.3 0.8 0.9 \nSingle parent 8.7 8.1 8.6 \nUI Status \nClaimant 13.0 22.8 21.6 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 13.1 13.3 13.3 \n8th or less 4.3 0.8 0.0 \nSome high school 8.7 5.7 6.0 \nHigh school graduate 34.8 36.6 38.8 \nHigh school equivalency 0.0 3.3 3.4 Some postsecondary 30.4 31.7 32.8 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 21.7 22.0 19.0 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 130Table III-15 \nServices Received by Dislocated Wo rker Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146 \nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated adult 6.1 15.6 27.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 0.0 22.6 48.3 0.0 0.8 2.1 \nPartner program 79.6 67.7 68.0 39.8 37.2 28.8 \nWagner-Peyser 76.2 65.6 66.3 25.0 34.1 28.1 TAA 8.0 4.7 4.2 18.5 8.5 1.4 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 3.5 2.6 2.7 0.9 4.7 2.7 Vocational Education 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nTitle V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 1.7 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.7 \nServices Received \nRapid Response 5.3 3.9 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster Relief 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 37.8 50.3 56.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core service s 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 40.0 41.7 47.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 52.6 42.2 44.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 6.8 7.4 6.2 9.6 \nTraining services 26.2 16.2 16.0 84.3 93.0 84.2 \nOn-the-job training 8.4 7.6 6.1 5.5 25.0 5.7 Skill upgrading & \nretraining 14.0 13.6 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.4 1.5 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in \ncombination with training 1.9 2.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 1.7 1.4 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 76.1 77.5 76.8 96.7 75.0 94.3 \nNeeds-related payments 0.9 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 15.6 9.7 9.0 58.3 45.7 47.9 \nPell Grant recipient 4.9 3.0 2.4 3.7 1.6 2.1 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 131 \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 47.4 57.8 55.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services \nonly 26.4 26.0 28.7 15.7 7.0 15.8 \nTraining services 26.2 16.2 16.0 84.3 93.0 84.2 \nITA established 19.7 12.1 11.9 81.5 69.8 79.5 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.0 21.4 20.8 43.7 35.5 31.6 \n13 or fewer weeks 47.6 63.5 60.3 25.9 26.4 24.0 \n14 to 26 weeks 17.0 12.9 14.3 22.2 31.0 29.5 \n27 to 39 weeks 10.6 7.4 8.7 11.1 15.5 19.9 40 to 52 weeks 5.6 4.4 6.0 10.2 8.5 13.7 More than 52 weeks 19.1 11.8 10.7 30.6 18.6 13.0 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 40.6 37.9 30.1 39.8 31.9 29.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 34.4 39.8 45.7 30.8 35.0 27.6 \n14 to 26 weeks 18.2 16.3 19.4 23.1 29.2 30.1 \n27 to 39 weeks 11.1 9.8 10.2 8.8 14.2 17.1 40 to 52 weeks 8.5 8.3 6.8 6.6 4.2 13.0 More than 52 weeks 27.7 25.8 17.8 30.8 17.5 12.2 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 32.7 32.8 31.1 0.0 3.6 62.5 \nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occupations 12.0 11.4 10.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 15.2 15.5 16.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 11.3 12.3 12.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 16.8 14.9 13.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 3.7 3.9 4.2 0.0 0.0 12.5 \nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, \nmaterial moving 31.6 32.9 34.8 100.0 96.4 25.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.9 3.1 2.7 Deceased 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 \nRetirement 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 132Table III-16 \nNumber of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Services Received, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146\nCoenrollment \nWIA dislocated adult 14,760 55,618 148,579 0 0 0\nWIA youth 270 264 302 0 0 0ARRA-funded 0 80,795 256,588 0 1 3\nPartner program 192,748 241,795 361,698 43 48 42\nWagner-Peyser 184,504 234,233 352,504 27 44 41TAA 19,340 16,892 22,237 20 11 2National Farmworker Jobs 73 220 182 0 0 0Veterans programs 8,537 9,318 14,240 1 6 4Vocational Education 299 215 266 0 0 0\nAdult Education 1,022 695 767 0 0 0\nTitle V Older Worker 54 53 39 0 0 0Other partner programs 4,106 3,125 4,485 0 1 1\nServices Received \nRapid Response 12,741 13,944 19,611 0 0 0\nDisaster Relief 3,563 4,387 5,137 0 0 0\nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 91,492 179,621 302,238 0 0 0\nStaff-assisted core services 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146\nWorkforce information 96,937 148,805 249,791 0 0 0\nIntensive Services 127,445 150,721 237,393 108 129 146\nPrevocational activities 22,230 24,357 39,360 13 8 14\nTraining services 63,519 57,955 84,969 91 120 123\nOn-the-job training 5,357 4,411 5,217 5 30 7Skill upgrading & \nretraining 8,923 7,876 13,086 0 0 0\nEntrepreneurial training 247 895 618 0 0 0\nABE or ESL in \ncombination with training 1,233 1,155 1,584 0 0 0\nCustomized training 1,109 840 1,454 0 0 0\nOther occupational skills \ntraining 48,339 44,916 65,289 88 90 116\nNeeds-related payments 2,129 989 1,151 0 0 0\nOther supportive services 37,688 34,570 48,022 63 59 70\nPell Grant recipient 6,243 4,549 5,626 4 2 3 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 133 \nNation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 242,176 357,123 531,617 108 129 146\nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 114,731 206,402 294,224 0 0 0\nIntensive & core services only 63,926 92,766 152,424 17 9 23\nTraining services 63,519 57,955 84,969 91 120 123\nITA established 47,815 43,043 63,459 88 90 116\nWeeks participated (average) \n13 or fewer weeks 115,311 226,785 320,820 28 34 35\n14 to 26 weeks 41,291 45,936 76,130 24 40 43\n27 to 39 weeks 25,736 26,257 46,013 12 20 2940 to 52 weeks 13,564 15,868 31,991 11 11 20More than 52 weeks 46,274 42,277 56,663 33 24 19\nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) \n13 or fewer weeks 21,633 22,958 38,604 28 42 34\n14 to 26 weeks 11,444 9,403 16,352 21 35 3727 to 39 weeks 6,997 5,659 8,631 8 17 21\n40 to 52 weeks 5,355 4,776 5,765 6 5 16\nMore than 52 weeks 17,374 14,915 15,048 28 21 15\nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 13,907 12,823 17,240 0 1 5\nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occupations 5,094 4,445 5,668 0 0 0\nService occupations 6,443 6,041 8,950 0 0 0\nHealthcare support occup. 4,798 4,817 7,115 0 0 0\nSales and clerical 7,142 5,829 7,632 0 0 0\nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 1,587 1,505 2,341 0 0 1\nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, material moving 13,408 12,851 19,335 5 27 2\nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 156 156 188 0 0 0\nHealth/medical 2,129 1,657 1,820 1 4 4Deceased 225 221 302 0 0 0\nFamily care 652 400 390 0 0 0\nReserve called to active duty 52 45 61 0 0 1Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 8 3 4 0 0 1\nRetirement 215 273 285 0 0 0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 134Table III-17 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Funding Source \n (Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Formula Funds \n All Exiters All Local Statewide NEG \nNumber of exiters 146 146 146 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 2.1 2.1 2.1 \nPartner program 28.8 28.8 28.8 \nWagner-Peyser 28.1 28.1 28.1 TAA 1.4 1.4 1.4 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 2.7 2.7 2.7 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.7 0.7 0.7 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.6 9.6 9.6 \nTraining services 84.2 84.2 84.2 \nOn-the-job training 5.7 5.7 5.7 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.3 94.3 94.3 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 47.9 47.9 47.9 \nPell Grant recipient 2.1 2.1 2.1 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 135 Formula Funds \n All Exiters All Local Statewide NEG \nNumber of exiters 146 146 146 0 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 15.8 15.8 15.8 \nTraining services 84.2 84.2 84.2 \nITA established 79.5 79.5 79.5 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.6 31.6 31.6 \n13 or fewer weeks 24.0 24.0 24.0 \n14 to 26 weeks 29.5 29.5 29.5 27 to 39 weeks 19.9 19.9 19.9 40 to 52 weeks 13.7 13.7 13.7 More than 52 weeks 13.0 13.0 13.0 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.4 29.4 29.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.6 27.6 27.6 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.1 30.1 30.1 27 to 39 weeks 17.1 17.1 17.1 40 to 52 weeks 13.0 13.0 13.0 \nMore than 52 weeks 12.2 12.2 12.2 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 62.5 62.5 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 0.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 12.5 12.5 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 25.0 25.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.7 2.7 2.7 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.7 0.7 0.7 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 0.7 0.7 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 136Table III-18 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Type of NEG Project \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n All Formula \nFunds NEG \nAll Disaster \nRelief Other \nNumber of exiters 146 146 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 2.1 2.1 Partner program 28.8 28.8 \nWagner-Peyser 28.1 28.1 TAA 1.4 1.4 \nNational Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 2.7 2.7 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 0.7 0.7 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.6 9.6 \nTraining services 84.2 84.2 \nOn-the-job training 5.7 5.7 \nSkill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.3 94.3 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 47.9 47.9 \nPell Grant recipient 2.1 2.1 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 137 All Formula \nFunds NEG \nAll Disaster \nRelief Other \nNumber of exiters 146 146 0 0 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 15.8 15.8 \nTraining services 84.2 84.2 \nITA established 79.5 79.5 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.6 31.6 \n13 or fewer weeks 24.0 24.0 14 to 26 weeks 29.5 29.5 27 to 39 weeks 19.9 19.9 40 to 52 weeks 13.7 13.7 More than 52 weeks 13.0 13.0 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.4 29.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.6 27.6 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.1 30.1 27 to 39 weeks 17.1 17.1 \n40 to 52 weeks 13.0 13.0 \nMore than 52 weeks 12.2 12.2 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 62.5 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 12.5 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 25.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.7 2.7 Deceased 0.0 0.0 \nFamily care 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.7 0.7 Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 0.7 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 138Table III-19 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Ex iters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n Under 22 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 11 44 56 34 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 9.1 0.0 1.8 2.9 \nPartner program 27.3 43.2 28.6 11.8 \nWagner-Peyser 27.3 40.9 28.6 11.8 TAA 9.1 2.3 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 5.4 2.9 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 0.0 4.5 8.9 20.6 \nTraining services 90.9 86.4 83.9 79.4 \nOn-the-job training 0.0 10.5 6.4 0.0 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 100.0 89.5 93.6 100.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 45.5 54.5 48.2 38.2 \nPell Grant recipient 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 139 Age at Participation \n Under 22 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 0 11 44 56 34 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 9.1 13.6 16.1 20.6 \nTraining services 90.9 86.4 83.9 79.4 \nITA established 90.9 77.3 78.6 79.4 \nWeeks participated (average) 25.0 34.9 30.3 31.3 \n13 or fewer weeks 45.5 20.5 19.6 29.4 \n14 to 26 weeks 36.4 22.7 35.7 26.5 27 to 39 weeks 9.1 22.7 23.2 14.7 40 to 52 weeks 0.0 22.7 10.7 8.8 More than 52 weeks 9.1 11.4 10.7 20.6 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 26.5 34.2 26.0 29.9 \n13 or fewer weeks 40.0 23.7 23.4 37.0 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.0 21.1 44.7 18.5 27 to 39 weeks 20.0 18.4 12.8 18.5 40 to 52 weeks 0.0 23.7 10.6 7.4 \nMore than 52 weeks 10.0 13.2 8.5 18.5 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 50.0 75.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 25.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 25.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 0.0 2.3 3.6 2.9 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 140Table III-20 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters fr om April 2009 to March 2010, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 145 138 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 2.1 1.4 Partner program 28.3 27.5 \nWagner-Peyser 27.6 26.8 \nTAA 1.4 1.4 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 2.8 2.2 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 \nTitle V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 0.7 0.0 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.7 10.1 \nTraining services 84.1 84.8 \nOn-the-job training 5.7 4.3 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 Entrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.3 95.7 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 48.3 49.3 \nPell Grant recipient 2.1 2.2 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 141 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 0 145 0 138 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 15.9 15.2 \nTraining services 84.1 84.8 \nITA established 79.3 81.2 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.8 31.9 \n13 or fewer weeks 23.4 23.9 14 to 26 weeks 29.7 29.0 \n27 to 39 weeks 20.0 19.6 \n40 to 52 weeks 13.8 14.5 More than 52 weeks 13.1 13.0 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.7 30.0 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.0 27.4 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.3 29.9 \n27 to 39 weeks 17.2 16.2 40 to 52 weeks 13.1 13.7 More than 52 weeks 12.3 12.8 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 50.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 16.7 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 33.3 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.8 2.9 Deceased 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.7 0.7 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 0.7 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 142Table III-21 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation, Gender, and Disability \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Employed at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters 138 95 51 19 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 2.2 3.2 0.0 5.3 \nPartner program 29.0 28.4 29.4 31.6 \nWagner-Peyser 28.3 28.4 27.5 31.6 TAA 1.4 1.1 2.0 5.3 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 2.9 2.1 3.9 5.3 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nTitle V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.4 9.5 9.8 31.6 \nTraining services 86.2 82.1 88.2 63.2 \nOn-the-job training 5.9 6.4 4.4 8.3 \nSkill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.1 93.6 95.6 91.7 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 47.1 44.2 54.9 42.1 \nPell Grant recipient 2.2 0.0 5.9 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 143 Employed at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters 0 138 95 51 19 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 13.8 17.9 11.8 36.8 \nTraining services 86.2 82.1 88.2 63.2 \nITA established 81.2 76.8 84.3 57.9 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.6 29.8 35.0 40.5 \n13 or fewer weeks 23.9 26.3 19.6 15.8 14 to 26 weeks 29.7 29.5 29.4 42.1 27 to 39 weeks 19.6 17.9 23.5 5.3 40 to 52 weeks 13.8 14.7 11.8 10.5 \nMore than 52 weeks 13.0 11.6 15.7 26.3 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.0 27.2 33.3 30.9 \n13 or fewer weeks 28.6 30.8 22.2 41.7 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.3 25.6 37.8 16.7 \n27 to 39 weeks 16.0 19.2 13.3 16.7 \n40 to 52 weeks 13.4 14.1 11.1 8.3 More than 52 weeks 11.8 10.3 15.6 16.7 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 66.7 50.0 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 16.7 0.0 100.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 16.7 50.0 0.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.9 2.1 3.9 0.0 \nDeceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nFamily care 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reserve called to active duty 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 144Table III-22 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Veteran Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 146 24 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 2.1 0.0 \nPartner program 28.8 20.8 \nWagner-Peyser 28.1 20.8 TAA 1.4 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 2.7 16.7 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.7 0.0 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.6 8.3 \nTraining services 84.2 79.2 \nOn-the-job training 5.7 0.0 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.3 100.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 47.9 41.7 \nPell Grant recipient 2.1 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 145 \nAll Exiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 146 24 0 0 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 15.8 20.8 \nTraining services 84.2 79.2 \nITA established 79.5 79.2 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.6 32.6 \n13 or fewer weeks 24.0 29.2 \n14 to 26 weeks 29.5 25.0 \n27 to 39 weeks 19.9 12.5 40 to 52 weeks 13.7 12.5 More than 52 weeks 13.0 20.8 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.4 30.7 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.6 31.6 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.1 21.1 27 to 39 weeks 17.1 15.8 40 to 52 weeks 13.0 15.8 More than 52 weeks 12.2 15.8 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.7 4.2 Deceased 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.7 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 146Table III-23 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Highest Grade Completed \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool \nHigh School \nGraduate \nSome Post-\nsecondary \nCollege \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 146 11 57 46 32 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 2.1 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 \nPartner program 28.8 36.4 26.3 34.8 21.9 \nWagner-Peyser 28.1 36.4 26.3 32.6 21.9 TAA 1.4 0.0 1.8 2.2 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 2.7 0.0 3.5 2.2 3.1 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core servi ces 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.6 36.4 8.8 6.5 6.3 \nTraining services 84.2 72.7 86.0 84.8 84.4 \nOn-the-job training 5.7 12.5 0.0 2.6 18.5 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.3 87.5 100.0 97.4 81.5 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 47.9 45.5 45.6 60.9 34.4 \nPell Grant recipient 2.1 0.0 1.8 4.3 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 147 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool \nHigh School \nGraduate \nSome Post-\nsecondary \nCollege \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 146 11 57 46 32 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 15.8 27.3 14.0 15.2 15.6 \nTraining services 84.2 72.7 86.0 84.8 84.4 \nITA established 79.5 63.6 86.0 82.6 68.8 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.6 28.5 31.1 37.5 25.1 \n13 or fewer weeks 24.0 9.1 22.8 26.1 28.1 \n14 to 26 weeks 29.5 45.5 35.1 21.7 25.0 \n27 to 39 weeks 19.9 27.3 14.0 13.0 37.5 40 to 52 weeks 13.7 9.1 15.8 17.4 6.3 More than 52 weeks 13.0 9.1 12.3 21.7 3.1 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.4 21.7 27.9 36.4 24.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.6 25.0 30.6 23.1 29.6 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.1 37.5 34.7 20.5 33.3 27 to 39 weeks 17.1 25.0 12.2 15.4 25.9 40 to 52 weeks 13.0 12.5 12.2 17.9 7.4 More than 52 weeks 12.2 0.0 10.2 23.1 3.7 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 50.0 0.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 50.0 100.0 0.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.7 0.0 5.3 2.2 0.0 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 148Table III-24 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by UI Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters 146 31 31 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 2.1 3.2 3.2 \nPartner program 28.8 100.0 100.0 \nWagner-Peyser 28.1 100.0 100.0 TAA 1.4 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 2.7 12.9 12.9 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.7 3.2 3.2 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.6 3.2 3.2 \nTraining services 84.2 90.3 90.3 \nOn-the-job training 5.7 10.7 10.7 Skill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.3 89.3 89.3 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 47.9 48.4 48.4 \nPell Grant recipient 2.1 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 149 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred by \nWPRS Not Referred \nby WPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters 146 31 0 31 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 15.8 9.7 9.7 \nTraining services 84.2 90.3 90.3 \nITA established 79.5 80.6 80.6 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.6 34.2 34.2 \n13 or fewer weeks 24.0 9.7 9.7 \n14 to 26 weeks 29.5 35.5 35.5 \n27 to 39 weeks 19.9 19.4 19.4 40 to 52 weeks 13.7 19.4 19.4 More than 52 weeks 13.0 16.1 16.1 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.4 29.1 29.1 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.6 10.7 10.7 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.1 46.4 46.4 27 to 39 weeks 17.1 14.3 14.3 40 to 52 weeks 13.0 21.4 21.4 More than 52 weeks 12.2 7.1 7.1 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 66.7 66.7 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 0.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 33.3 33.3 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.7 6.5 6.5 Deceased 0.0 0.0 0.0 Family care 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.7 0.0 0.0 \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 3.2 3.2 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 150Table III-25 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 \nwho Received Intensive or Training Services, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nWith Intensive \nor Training \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient \nNumber of exiters 146 12 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 \nWIA youth 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 2.1 8.3 Partner program 28.8 50.0 \nWagner-Peyser 28.1 41.7 TAA 1.4 8.3 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 2.7 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 Title V Older Worker 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 0.7 8.3 \nServices Received \nRapid response 0.0 0.0 \nDisaster relief 0.0 0.0 Core self-service and \ninformational activities 0.0 0.0 \nStaff-assisted core services 100.0 100.0 \nWorkforce information 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive Services 100.0 100.0 \nPrevocational activities 9.6 8.3 \nTraining services 84.2 83.3 \nOn-the-job training 5.7 0.0 \nSkill upgrading & retraining 0.0 0.0 \nEntrepreneurial training 0.0 0.0 ABE or ESL in combination \nwith training 0.0 0.0 \nCustomized training 0.0 0.0 \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 94.3 100.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 47.9 83.3 \nPell Grant recipient 2.1 25.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 151 \nWith Intensive \nor Training \nServices Limited \nEnglish-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient \nNumber of exiters 146 0 12 0 \nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, only 0.0 0.0 \nIntensive & core services only 15.8 16.7 \nTraining services 84.2 83.3 \nITA established 79.5 83.3 \nWeeks participated (average) 31.6 41.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 24.0 33.3 \n14 to 26 weeks 29.5 16.7 27 to 39 weeks 19.9 16.7 40 to 52 weeks 13.7 8.3 More than 52 weeks 13.0 25.0 \nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) 29.4 44.4 \n13 or fewer weeks 27.6 30.0 \n14 to 26 weeks 30.1 20.0 \n27 to 39 weeks 17.1 20.0 \n40 to 52 weeks 13.0 0.0 More than 52 weeks 12.2 30.0 \nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical 62.5 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 \nService occupations 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 \nSales and clerical 0.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction 12.5 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving 25.0 \nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized 0.0 0.0 \nHealth/medical 2.7 8.3 Deceased 0.0 0.0 \nFamily care 0.0 0.0 \nReserve called to active duty 0.7 0.0 Relocated to mandated \nresidential program 0.7 0.0 \nRetirement 0.0 0.0 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 152Table III-26 \nServices Received by Dislocated Worker Exit ers from April 2009 to March 2010 , by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNumber of \nExiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNation 531,617 55.3 28.7 16.0 11.9 \nAlabama 1,087 0.1 16.2 83.7 56.4 Alaska 335 0.9 39.4 59.7 37.0 Arizona 2,287 26.9 34.1 39.0 28.8 Arkansas 792 0.1 38.5 61.4 58.8 \nCalifornia 38,932 25.4 60.2 14.4 8.4 \nColorado 671 0.9 27.6 71.5 59.9 Connecticut 1,048 4.1 27.1 68.8 29.0 Delaware 334 2.1 22.2 75.7 75.7 District of Columbia 104 5.8 48.1 46.2 41.3 Florida 3,575 11.8 26.2 61.9 54.3 \nGeorgia 2,889 0.6 15.3 84.1 79.2 \nHawaii 580 28.3 35.9 35.9 34.7 Idaho 876 0.1 14.6 85.3 55.3 Illinois 7,598 7.2 36.3 56.5 53.8 Indiana 25,712 9.4 78.8 11.8 8.1 \nIowa 4,627 56.4 23.7 19.9 6.6 \nKansas 2,088 44.7 32.7 22.7 21.5 Kentucky 1,970 0.1 44.4 55.6 47.9 Louisiana 10,718 81.1 5.8 13.2 9.5 Maine 918 7.2 30.4 62.4 55.8 Maryland 1,402 3.9 49.0 47.1 11.7 \nMassachusetts 4,051 0.0 38.8 61.2 58.3 \nMichigan 5,685 9.2 27.4 63.4 46.7 Minnesota 3,571 2.0 64.4 33.6 31.8 Mississippi 14,183 47.7 21.0 31.4 10.7 Missouri 3,298 14.8 45.2 40.0 17.4 \nMontana 559 0.9 17.7 81.4 61.2 \nNebraska 452 0.0 21.2 78.8 71.2 Nevada 1,096 2.1 64.5 33.4 31.0 New Hampshire 852 14.2 35.1 50.7 50.0 New Jersey 2,957 0.8 18.0 81.3 78.1 \nNew Mexico 319 21.3 11.6 67.1 46.7 \nNew York 216,175 78.2 17.4 4.4 3.8 North Carolina 4,077 0.0 31.9 68.1 68.1 North Dakota 234 9.4 44.9 45.7 37.6 Ohio 6,523 19.0 20.8 60.2 49.2 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 153 \nNumber of \nExiters Core \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices Only \n \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nOklahoma 18,069 94.0 2.5 3.5 3.4 \nOregon 95,929 73.0 24.8 2.2 0.7 Pennsylvania 8,151 10.2 46.7 43.0 22.0 Puerto Rico 1,752 17.5 60.2 22.3 8.5 \nRhode Island 1,514 19.9 26.2 54.0 50.7 \nSouth Carolina 7,811 0.1 51.3 48.6 29.4 South Dakota 499 0.0 52.7 47.3 21.4 Tennessee 3,447 3.8 25.3 71.0 50.5 Texas 10,930 4.2 62.1 33.7 31.7 \nUtah 772 3.2 3.4 93.4 87.8 \nVermont 146 0.0 15.8 84.2 79.5 Virgin Islands 161 1.9 9.3 88.8 87.6 Virginia 2,718 1.9 54.5 43.6 39.6 Washington 3,042 3.1 39.1 57.8 43.5 West Virginia 940 6.6 32.8 60.6 38.6 \nWisconsin 3,117 3.6 47.7 48.7 36.5 \nWyoming 44 0.0 27.3 72.7 70.5 \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 154Table III-27 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \n Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 249,491 296,642 417,929 130 125 113 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter \nafter exit) (excludes employed \nat entry) 67.8 58.0 51.2 85.5 82.2 68.9 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd qtrs. 83.5 80.1 79.3 93.6 89.1 79.2 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & \n3rd qtrs. $16,390 $16,757 $16,945 $12,732 $11,847 $11,329 \nOther WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd \nquarter after exit 86.0 83.0 82.4 93.6 90.1 83.3 \nRetained employment 4th \nquarter after exit 80.7 79.3 90.8 89.2 \nEarnings replacement rate 86.8 77.0 72.4 84.5 72.0 58.3 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd qtrs. after exit $-2,135 $-4,141 $-5,322 $-2,197 $-4,161 $-6,690 \n3rd and 4th qtrs. after exit $-2,870 $-4,657 $-2,322 $-4,110 \nCredential and employment \nrate 59.4 55.5 50.4 62.5 62.2 50.5 \nInformation about \nEmployment in Quarter \nafter exit \nOccupation of employment \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 23.7 23.3 23.0 18.8 17.7 26.4 \nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occup. 5.5 6.1 5.7 3.5 3.8 5.7 \nService occupations 14.8 15.7 16.6 8.2 5.1 3.8 \nHealthcare support occ. 6.4 7.1 7.4 2.4 1.3 3.8 \nSales and clerical 24.6 24.6 23.2 17.6 16.5 18.9 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 3.6 3.7 4.2 2.4 1.3 1.9 \nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, and material moving 33.4 32.7 33.0 52.9 59.5 49.1 \nNontraditional \nemployment 1.9 2.0 1.9 0.9 1.0 3.8 \nMales 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.1 \nFemales 2.1 2.2 2.2 0.0 0.0 6.7 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 155 Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 249,491 296,642 417,929 130 125 113 \nOther Outcome \nInformation \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit 68.7 58.9 51.9 86.5 83.5 70.9 \nSecond quarter after exit 68.9 59.1 53.1 86.5 81.8 71.3 Third quarter after exit 67.3 58.2 54.4 81.7 76.0 64.5 Fourth quarter after exit 64.5 59.3 81.0 77.5 \nAverage earnings (among with earnings) \nQuarter after exit $7,381 $7,393 $7,342 $6,237 $5,924 $7,249 \nSecond quarter after exit $7,575 $7,535 $7,652 $6,053 $5,576 $6,942 Third quarter after exit $7,625 $7,739 $7,845 $6,371 $5,879 $5,358 Fourth quarter after exit $7,674 $7,762 $6,418 $5,932 \nEarnings quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 20.3 23.2 25.4 11.0 11.9 9.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.7 23.4 22.9 20.2 23.8 23.1 $5,000 to $7,499 22.0 20.6 19.3 39.4 38.6 28.2 \n$7,500 to $9,999 13.8 12.9 12.3 18.3 17.8 17.9 \n$10,000 or more 20.1 19.8 20.2 11.0 7.9 21.8 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after \nexit \n$1 to $2,499 18.5 20.1 21.2 16.5 20.7 15.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 22.2 22.0 21.1 15.5 18.5 25.0 \n$5,000 to $7,499 22.1 21.1 20.3 33.0 33.7 45.0 $7,500 to $9,999 14.9 14.4 14.3 22.3 15.2 10.0 $10,000 or more 22.3 22.3 23.1 12.6 12.0 5.0 \nAttained credential \n(among with training) 67.8 65.5 62.7 68.8 70.3 64.9 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.5 1.6 1.5 0.9 1.8 1.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 9.6 9.4 7.6 11.6 14.4 8.2 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certific\nate 50.4 49.9 49.7 56.3 51.4 52.6 \nOther 6.2 4.5 3.9 0.0 2.7 3.1 \nNote: Outcome data for exiters from April 2008 to Ma rch 2009 are incomplete. Data for outcomes in the \nfourth quarter after exit are ba sed on 9 months of exiters. \nOutcome data for exiters from October 2008 to Sept ember 2009 do not include fourth quarter outcomes; \nSecond and third quarter outcomes are based on 9 and 6 months of exiters, respectively. Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 156Table III-28 \nNumber of Dislocated Worker Exiters Attaining Outcomes by Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril \n2008–Mar. \n2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 249,491 296,642 417,929 130 125 113 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter \nafter exit) (excludes employed \nat entry) 157,713 161,812 202,518 94 88 71 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd \nquarters 141,375 138,092 68,327 102 90 19 \nOther WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd \nquarter after exit 145,587 143,002 71,031 102 91 20 \nRetained employment 4th \nquarter after exit 136,620 99,722 31,074 99 83 13 \nEarnings replacement rate 34,914 30,172 30,484 70 69 49 \nCredential and employment \nrate 8,607 7,269 7,242 16 14 14 \nInformation about \nEmployment in Quarter \nafter exit \nOccupation of employment \nManagerial, professional, \n& technical 2,010 1,915 1,809 3 3 3 \nHealthcare practitioners \nand technical occup. 5,374 4,914 5,224 7 4 2 \nService occupations 2,338 2,214 2,315 2 1 2 \nHealthcare support occ. 8,941 7,680 7,295 15 13 10 \nSales and clerical 1,294 1,144 1,317 2 1 1 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 12,130 10,200 10,394 45 47 26 \nInstallation, repair, \nproduction, transportation, \nand material moving 132,927 141,153 183,100 24 22 25 \nNontraditional employment 2,994 3,201 3,953 1 1 3 \nMales 1,307 1,446 1,834 1 1 1 Females 1,687 1,755 2,119 0 0 2 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 157 Nation \nOct. 2007– \nSep. 2008 Nation \nApril \n2008–Mar. \n2009 Nation \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApril 2008–\nMar. 2009 State \nOct. 2008–\nSep. 2009 \nNumber of exiters 249,491 296,642 417,929 130 125 113 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit 169,273 172,360 214,572 109 101 78 \nSecond quarter after exit 169,827 173,106 152,284 109 99 57 Third quarter after exit 165,837 170,282 88,934 103 92 20 Fourth quarter after exit 158,915 120,277 40,495 102 86 14 \nEarnings quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 33,293 38,876 52,907 12 12 7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 38,876 39,231 47,662 22 24 18 \n$5,000 to $7,499 36,150 34,497 40,236 43 39 22 \n$7,500 to $9,999 22,695 21,607 25,602 20 18 14 $10,000 or more 33,006 33,149 42,056 12 8 17 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after \nexit \n$1 to $2,499 29,748 33,272 18,409 17 19 3 \n$2,500 to $4,999 35,695 36,469 18,339 16 17 5 \n$5,000 to $7,499 35,534 34,945 17,619 34 31 9 $7,500 to $9,999 23,986 23,885 12,431 23 14 2 $10,000 or more 35,786 36,963 20,010 13 11 1 \nAttained credential (among \nwith training) 39,814 35,590 37,901 77 78 63 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 903 887 878 1 2 1 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 5,636 5,123 4,589 13 16 8 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificat\ne 29,623 27,128 30,076 63 57 51 \nOther 3,652 2,452 2,358 0 3 3 \nNote: Outcome data for exiters from April 2008 to Ma rch 2009 are incomplete. Data for outcomes in the \nfourth quarter after exit are ba sed on 9 months of exiters. \nOutcome data for exiters from October 2008 to Septem ber 2009 do not include fourth quarter outcomes. Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 158Table III-29 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Funding Source \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Formula \n All Exiters All Local Statewide NEG \nNumber of exiters1 113 113 113 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 68.9 68.9 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters 2 89.1 89.1 89.1 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd \nqtrs.2 $11,847 $11,847 $11,847 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 90.1 90.1 90.1 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 89.2 89.2 89.2 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.0 72.0 72.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,161 $-4,161 $-4,161 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,110 $-4,110 $-4,110 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 50.5 50.5 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 26.4 26.4 26.4 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.4 4.4 4.4 \nService occupations 3.8 3.8 3.8 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 2.7 2.7 \nSales and clerical 18.9 18.9 18.9 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 1.9 1.9 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material \nmoving 49.1 49.1 49.1 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.8 3.8 3.8 \nMales 2.1 2.1 2.1 Females 6.7 6.7 6.7 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 159 Formula \n All Exiters All Local Statewide NEG \nNumber of exiters 113 113 113 0 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.9 70.9 70.9 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.4 78.4 78.4 \nThird quarter after exit2 76.0 76.0 76.0 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.5 77.5 77.5 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,249 $7,249 $7,249 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,721 $5,721 $5,721 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,879 $5,879 $5,879 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,932 $5,932 $5,932 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.0 9.0 9.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 23.1 23.1 $5,000 to $7,499 28.2 28.2 28.2 \n$7,500 to $9,999 17.9 17.9 17.9 \n$10,000 or more 21.8 21.8 21.8 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.7 20.7 20.7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.5 18.5 18.5 $5,000 to $7,499 33.7 33.7 33.7 \n$7,500 to $9,999 15.2 15.2 15.2 \n$10,000 or more 12.0 12.0 12.0 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 64.9 64.9 64.9 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.0 1.0 1.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 8.2 8.2 8.2 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 52.6 52.6 \nOther 3.1 3.1 3.1 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 160Table III-30 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Type of NEG Project \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Formula \nFunds NEG \n All Exiters All Disaster Other \nNumber of exiters1 113 113 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 68.9 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 89.1 89.1 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd \nqtrs.2 $11,847 $11,847 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 90.1 90.1 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 89.2 89.2 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.0 72.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,161 $-4,161 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,110 $-4,110 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 50.5 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 26.4 26.4 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.4 4.4 \nService occupations 3.8 3.8 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 2.7 \nSales and clerical 18.9 18.9 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 1.9 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material \nmoving 49.1 49.1 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.8 3.8 \nMales 2.1 2.1 Females 6.7 6.7 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 161 Formula \nFunds NEG \n All Exiters All Disaster Other \nNumber of exiters 113 113 0 0 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.9 70.9 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.4 78.4 \nThird quarter after exit2 76.0 76.0 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.5 77.5 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,249 $7,249 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,721 $5,721 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,879 $5,879 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,932 $5,932 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.0 9.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 23.1 $5,000 to $7,499 28.2 28.2 \n$7,500 to $9,999 17.9 17.9 \n$10,000 or more 21.8 21.8 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.7 20.7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.5 18.5 $5,000 to $7,499 33.7 33.7 \n$7,500 to $9,999 15.2 15.2 \n$10,000 or more 12.0 12.0 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 64.9 64.9 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.0 1.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 8.2 8.2 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 52.6 \nOther 3.1 3.1 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 162Table III-31 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n Under 22 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters1 11 37 38 27 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 66.7 77.4 73.0 53.8 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 77.8 88.9 91.7 90.9 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd \nqtrs.2 $12,949 $12,490 $12,888 $9,425 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 77.8 91.1 91.7 90.9 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 88.9 85.0 95.7 90.0 \nEarnings replacement rate2 90.2 82.8 64.3 57.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-1,096 $-2,348 $-6,670 $-6,457 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-1,207 $-2,272 $-6,233 $-6,730 \nCredential and employment rate1 44.4 59.4 51.5 39.1 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 0.0 38.1 27.8 10.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 0.0 2.1 8.8 4.3 \nService occupations 0.0 0.0 5.6 10.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 0.0 0.0 2.9 8.7 \nSales and clerical 25.0 14.3 27.8 10.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material \nmoving 75.0 47.6 33.3 70.0 \nNontraditional employment\n1 0.0 6.7 3.7 0.0 \nMales 0.0 0.0 6.3 0.0 Females 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 163 Age at Participation \n Under 22 22 to 29 30 – 44 45 – 54 55 and Over \nNumber of exiters 0 11 37 38 27 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.0 81.1 73.0 53.8 \nSecond quarter after exit4 75.0 83.7 83.3 68.8 \nThird quarter after exit2 70.0 78.8 76.7 74.1 \nFourth quarter after exit3 88.9 74.5 79.3 75.0 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $5,837 $8,197 $7,662 $5,126 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $6,257 $6,030 $5,877 $4,932 \nThird quarter after exit2 $6,873 $5,913 $6,629 $4,816 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,210 $6,434 $6,656 $4,762 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 0.0 3.3 7.4 28.6 \n$2,500 to $4,999 42.9 13.3 29.6 21.4 $5,000 to $7,499 14.3 40.0 18.5 28.6 \n$7,500 to $9,999 42.9 16.7 18.5 7.1 \n$10,000 or more 0.0 26.7 25.9 14.3 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 28.6 17.1 21.7 20.0 $2,500 to $4,999 14.3 17.1 13.0 30.0 $5,000 to $7,499 14.3 46.3 17.4 35.0 \n$7,500 to $9,999 14.3 12.2 26.1 10.0 \n$10,000 or more 28.6 7.3 21.7 5.0 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 66.7 65.6 69.7 56.5 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 11.1 12.5 3.0 8.7 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 55.6 43.8 63.6 47.8 \nOther 0.0 6.3 3.0 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 164Table III-32 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Ex iters, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters1 112 105 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.6 68.4 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 89.0 88.9 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $11,768 $11,687 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 90.0 89.9 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 89.1 89.0 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.2 71.8 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,095 $-4,131 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,025 $-4,076 \nCredential and employment rate1 51.0 51.6 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 25.0 22.9 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.5 4.7 \nService occupations 3.8 4.2 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 2.8 \nSales and clerical 19.2 16.7 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 2.1 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 50.0 54.2 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.9 4.2 \nMales 2.1 2.3 Females 6.9 7.1 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 165 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 0 112 0 105 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.6 70.6 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.0 78.3 \nThird quarter after exit2 75.8 76.9 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.3 77.8 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,130 $6,542 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,570 $5,524 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,838 $5,783 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,907 $5,867 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.1 9.7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.4 25.0 $5,000 to $7,499 28.6 29.2 \n$7,500 to $9,999 18.2 19.4 \n$10,000 or more 20.8 16.7 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.9 21.1 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.7 18.9 $5,000 to $7,499 34.1 34.4 \n$7,500 to $9,999 14.3 14.4 \n$10,000 or more 12.1 11.1 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 65.6 67.0 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.0 1.1 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 8.3 7.7 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 53.1 54.9 \nOther 3.1 3.3 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 166Table III-33 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Gender and Disability \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Employment at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters1 106 77 36 14 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 63.9 80.6 42.9 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 88.6 84.6 93.9 100.0 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $11,971 $14,398 $9,407 $14,593 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 89.8 86.5 93.9 100.0 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 90.2 87.5 91.1 60.0 \nEarnings replacement rate2 74.0 69.7 75.8 75.2 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-3,779 $-5,404 $-2,841 $-4,821 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-3,668 $-5,987 $-2,108 $-7,353 \nCredential and employment rate1 49.5 49.2 52.9 40.0 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 22.9 17.6 42.1 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.8 1.6 8.2 0.0 \nService occupations 4.2 2.9 5.3 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.9 3.1 2.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 20.8 8.8 36.8 50.0 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 2.1 2.9 0.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 50.0 67.6 15.8 50.0 \nNontraditional employment\n1 2.8 2.1 6.7 0.0 \nMales 2.2 2.1 0.0 Females 4.0 6.7 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 167 Employment at Participation Gender With a \nDisability Yes No Male Female \nNumber of exiters 0 106 77 36 14 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 68.9 64.9 83.3 42.9 \nSecond quarter after exit4 77.4 71.0 87.5 50.0 \nThird quarter after exit2 74.8 74.2 78.0 62.5 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.8 78.6 76.4 50.0 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,313 $7,729 $6,481 $7,188 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,771 $6,451 $4,990 $5,950 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,944 $7,070 $4,688 $9,066 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,903 $6,622 $5,208 $4,231 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.9 8.3 10.0 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 22.5 18.8 30.0 33.3 \n$5,000 to $7,499 25.4 29.2 26.7 16.7 \n$7,500 to $9,999 19.7 20.8 13.3 16.7 \n$10,000 or more 22.5 22.9 20.0 33.3 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit2 \n$1 to $2,499 22.5 10.9 30.4 0.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 16.3 8.7 28.3 20.0 $5,000 to $7,499 33.8 41.3 26.1 40.0 \n$7,500 to $9,999 15.0 21.7 8.7 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 12.5 17.4 6.5 40.0 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 64.5 68.3 58.8 60.0 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 6.5 6.3 11.8 20.0 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 54.8 55.6 47.1 40.0 \nOther 3.2 4.8 0.0 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 168Table III-34 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Veteran Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters1 113 20 13 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 63.2 69.2 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 89.1 84.6 87.5 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $11,847 $11,624 $10,192 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after \nexit2 90.1 84.6 87.5 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after \nexit3 89.2 90.9 100.0 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.0 69.4 68.3 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,161 $-4,635 $-4,418 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,110 $-5,698 $-5,598 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 44.4 58.3 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 26.4 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.4 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 3.8 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 18.9 33.3 42.9 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 0.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 49.1 66.7 57.1 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.8 0.0 0.0 \nMales 2.1 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 6.7 0.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 169 \nAll Exiters Veteran Campaign \nVeteran Recently \nSeparated \nVeteran Disabled \nVeteran \nNumber of exiters 113 20 13 0 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.9 63.2 69.2 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.4 85.0 92.3 \nThird quarter after exit2 76.0 78.6 77.8 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.5 90.9 100.0 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,249 $5,218 $5,872 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,721 $5,135 $5,231 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,879 $5,807 $4,812 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,932 $5,618 $5,079 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.0 25.0 22.2 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 25.0 22.2 $5,000 to $7,499 28.2 25.0 22.2 $7,500 to $9,999 17.9 16.7 22.2 \n$10,000 or more 21.8 8.3 11.1 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.7 27.3 28.6 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.5 18.2 28.6 \n$5,000 to $7,499 33.7 27.3 28.6 \n$7,500 to $9,999 15.2 0.0 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 12.0 27.3 14.3 \nAttained credential (among received \ntraining)1 64.9 61.1 66.7 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.0 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 8.2 5.6 8.3 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 55.6 58.3 \nOther 3.1 0.0 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 170Table III-35 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters who Rece ived Intensive or Training Services, \nby Highest Grade Completed \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool High \nSchool \nGraduate Some \nPost-\nsecondary College \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters1 113 12 48 33 20 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 70.0 67.4 67.7 73.7 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 89.1 75.0 89.4 100.0 83.3 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $11,847 $8,262 $12,642 $11,393 $10,464 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 90.1 83.3 89.4 100.0 83.3 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 89.2 81.8 87.1 100.0 100.0 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.0 45.3 79.7 76.8 41.1 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,161 $-7,701 $-2,932 $-3,432 $-12,661 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,110 $-6,983 $-3,412 $-2,927 $-11,760 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 70.0 47.6 53.6 41.2 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 26.4 0.0 4.5 38.5 66.7 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.4 0.0 3.2 8.0 7.1 \nService occupations 3.8 0.0 9.1 0.0 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 \nSales and clerical 18.9 0.0 18.2 23.1 25.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 49.1 100.0 63.6 38.5 8.3 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.8 0.0 3.1 4.5 6.7 \nMales 2.1 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 6.7 0.0 0.0 10.0 12.5 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 171 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Less than \nHigh \nSchool High \nSchool \nGraduate Some \nPost-\nsecondary College \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 113 12 48 33 20 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.9 75.0 69.6 68.8 75.0 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.4 61.5 83.6 76.7 73.3 \nThird quarter after exit2 76.0 76.9 77.6 81.0 54.5 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.5 75.0 78.9 84.2 55.6 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,249 $5,189 $6,341 $6,410 $11,652 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,721 $3,392 $5,534 $6,558 $6,611 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,879 $3,522 $6,240 $5,855 $6,327 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,932 $5,050 $6,117 $5,721 $6,118 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.0 11.1 12.5 4.5 6.7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 33.3 18.8 31.8 13.3 $5,000 to $7,499 28.2 44.4 31.3 36.4 0.0 $7,500 to $9,999 17.9 0.0 28.1 9.1 20.0 \n$10,000 or more 21.8 11.1 9.4 18.2 60.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.7 60.0 13.6 23.5 16.7 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.5 10.0 18.6 17.6 33.3 $5,000 to $7,499 33.7 20.0 39.0 29.4 16.7 $7,500 to $9,999 15.2 0.0 16.9 23.5 0.0 \n$10,000 or more 12.0 10.0 11.9 5.9 33.3 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 64.9 80.0 61.9 67.9 58.8 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 8.2 0.0 9.5 10.7 5.9 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 60.0 47.6 57.1 52.9 \nOther 3.1 10.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 172Table III-36 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters who Received Intensive or Training Services, by UI Status \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred \nby WPRS Not \nReferred by \nWPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters1 113 23 23 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 85.7 85.7 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 89.1 91.7 91.7 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd \nqtrs.2 $11,847 $9,008 $9,008 \nOther WIA Performance and \n12-Month Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 90.1 91.7 91.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 89.2 83.3 83.3 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.0 72.6 72.6 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,161 $-3,178 $-3,178 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,110 $-3,605 $-3,605 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 52.6 52.6 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 26.4 16.7 16.7 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.4 0.0 0.0 \nService occupations 3.8 8.3 8.3 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 5.3 5.3 \nSales and clerical 18.9 16.7 16.7 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 8.3 8.3 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material \nmoving 49.1 50.0 50.0 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.8 5.3 5.3 \nMales 2.1 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 6.7 14.3 14.3 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 173 With \nIntensive or \nTraining \nServices UI Claimant \n \nAll Referred \nby WPRS Not \nReferred by \nWPRS UI \nExhaustee \nNumber of exiters 113 23 0 23 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.9 86.4 86.4 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.4 90.0 90.0 \nThird quarter after exit2 76.0 78.6 78.6 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.5 76.9 76.9 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,249 $7,488 $7,488 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,721 $5,583 $5,583 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,879 $4,860 $4,860 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,932 $4,235 $4,235 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.0 5.3 5.3 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 21.1 21.1 $5,000 to $7,499 28.2 21.1 21.1 \n$7,500 to $9,999 17.9 26.3 26.3 \n$10,000 or more 21.8 26.3 26.3 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.7 45.5 45.5 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.5 18.2 18.2 \n$5,000 to $7,499 33.7 18.2 18.2 $7,500 to $9,999 15.2 0.0 0.0 $10,000 or more 12.0 18.2 18.2 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 64.9 63.2 63.2 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.0 0.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 8.2 5.3 5.3 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 57.9 57.9 \nOther 3.1 0.0 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 174Table III-37 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters who Rece ived Intensive or Training Services, \nby Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Limited English-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient \nNumber of exiters1 113 10 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 75.0 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 89.1 100.0 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $11,847 $13,040 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter after \nexit2 90.1 100.0 \nRetained employment 4th quarter after \nexit3 89.2 100.0 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.0 84.0 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,161 $-2,476 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,110 $-4,580 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 40.0 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 26.4 60.0 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.4 0.0 \nService occupations 3.8 0.0 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 0.0 \nSales and clerical 18.9 40.0 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 0.0 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 49.1 0.0 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.8 0.0 \nMales 2.1 0.0 \nFemales 6.7 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 175 With Intensive \nor Training \nServices Limited English-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient \nNumber of exiters 113 0 10 0 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.9 80.0 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.4 81.8 \nThird quarter after exit2 76.0 90.0 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.5 87.5 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,249 $7,391 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,721 $7,104 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,879 $6,679 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,932 $4,563 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.0 12.5 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 0.0 $5,000 to $7,499 28.2 62.5 $7,500 to $9,999 17.9 12.5 \n$10,000 or more 21.8 12.5 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.7 22.2 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.5 0.0 $5,000 to $7,499 33.7 55.6 $7,500 to $9,999 15.2 11.1 \n$10,000 or more 12.0 11.1 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 64.9 40.0 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 8.2 20.0 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 20.0 \nOther 3.1 0.0 \n \n \nBased on exiters from Oct ober 2008 to September 2009. \nBased on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \nBased on exiters from Janua ry 2008 to December 2008. \nBased on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 176Table III-38 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exit ers, by Major Service Categories \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \n \nAll Exiters \nCore \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices \nOnly \n \nTraining \n \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters1 113 13 100 86 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 68.9 60.0 69.9 65.0 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 89.1 100.0 88.2 90.8 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd \nqtrs.2 $11,847 $16,045 $11,437 $12,984 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 90.1 100.0 89.2 90.8 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 89.2 85.7 89.5 91.5 \nEarnings replacement rate2 72.0 77.5 71.3 74.4 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,161 $-4,660 $-4,118 $-4,084 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,110 $-4,856 $-4,049 $-4,145 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 50.5 45.8 \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 26.4 75.0 22.4 22.2 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 4.4 10.0 3.9 5.6 \nService occupations 3.8 0.0 4.1 5.6 \nHealthcare support occup. 2.7 10.0 1.9 2.8 \nSales and clerical 18.9 0.0 20.4 27.8 \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 1.9 0.0 2.0 2.8 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material moving 49.1 25.0 51.0 41.7 \nNontraditional employment\n1 3.8 11.1 2.9 1.8 \nMales 2.1 0.0 2.4 3.6 \nFemales 6.7 50.0 3.6 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 177 \n \nAll Exiters \nCore \nServices \nOnly Core and \nIntensive \nServices \nOnly \nTraining \nITA \nEstablished \nNumber of exiters 113 0 13 100 86 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 70.9 69.2 71.1 66.3 \nSecond quarter after exit4 78.4 77.8 78.4 74.7 \nThird quarter after exit2 76.0 80.0 75.7 73.2 \nFourth quarter after exit3 77.5 66.7 78.4 77.0 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $7,249 $9,459 $6,961 $6,606 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $5,721 $8,879 $5,478 $6,138 \nThird quarter after exit2 $5,879 $8,213 $5,657 $6,545 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $5,932 $8,634 $5,729 $6,252 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 9.0 0.0 10.1 10.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 23.1 11.1 24.6 25.5 $5,000 to $7,499 28.2 33.3 27.5 27.3 \n$7,500 to $9,999 17.9 22.2 17.4 16.4 \n$10,000 or more 21.8 33.3 20.3 20.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 20.7 0.0 22.6 10.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 18.5 12.5 19.0 18.3 \n$5,000 to $7,499 33.7 37.5 33.3 41.7 \n$7,500 to $9,999 15.2 25.0 14.3 16.7 \n$10,000 or more 12.0 25.0 10.7 13.3 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)1 64.9 64.9 62.7 \nHigh school \ndiploma/equivalency 1.0 1.0 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree 8.2 8.2 9.6 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 52.6 53.0 \nOther 3.1 3.1 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 178Table III-39 \nOutcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Type of Training \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters1 13 100 14 86 \nCommon Measures \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) (excludes employed at entry)1 60.0 69.9 100.0 65.0 \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters2 100.0 88.2 82.8 90.8 \nAverage earnings in 2nd & 3rd qtrs.2 $16,045 $11,437 $7,760 $12,984 \nOther WIA Performance and 12-\nMonth Outcomes \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 100.0 89.2 86.2 90.8 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit3 85.7 89.5 85.7 91.5 \nEarnings replacement rate2 77.5 71.3 62.9 74.4 \nEarnings Change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $-4,660 $-4,118 $-3,998 $-4,084 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit3 $-4,856 $-4,049 $-3,671 $-4,145 \nCredential and employment rate1 50.5 78.6 45.8 \nInformation about Employment in \nQuarter after exit \nOccupation of employment1 \nManagerial, professional, & \ntechnical 75.0 22.4 23.1 22.2 \nHealthcare practitioners and \ntechnical occupations 10.0 3.9 0.0 5.6 \nService occupations 0.0 4.1 0.0 5.6 \nHealthcare support occup. 10.0 1.9 0.0 2.8 \nSales and clerical 0.0 20.4 0.0 27.8 Farming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction and extraction 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.8 \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, and material \nmoving 25.0 51.0 76.9 41.7 \nNontraditional employment\n1 11.1 2.9 7.1 1.8 \nMales 0.0 2.4 0.0 3.6 \nFemales 50.0 3.6 100.0 0.0 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 179 \nNo Training Any \nTraining Basic Skills \nTraining On-the-job \nTraining Occupational \nTraining \nNumber of exiters 13 100 0 14 86 \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment \nQuarter after exit1 69.2 71.1 100.0 66.3 \nSecond quarter after exit4 77.8 78.4 89.7 74.7 \nThird quarter after exit2 80.0 75.7 83.3 73.2 \nFourth quarter after exit3 66.7 78.4 82.8 77.0 \nAverage earnings (among with \nearnings) \nQuarter after exit1 $9,459 $6,961 $8,356 $6,606 \nSecond quarter after exit4 $8,879 $5,478 $3,827 $6,138 \nThird quarter after exit2 $8,213 $5,657 $3,582 $6,545 \nFourth quarter after exit3 $8,634 $5,729 $4,527 $6,252 \nEarnings quarter after exit1 \n$1 to $2,499 0.0 10.1 7.1 10.9 \n$2,500 to $4,999 11.1 24.6 21.4 25.5 $5,000 to $7,499 33.3 27.5 28.6 27.3 $7,500 to $9,999 22.2 17.4 21.4 16.4 $10,000 or more 33.3 20.3 21.4 20.0 \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit\n2 \n$1 to $2,499 0.0 22.6 52.0 10.0 \n$2,500 to $4,999 12.5 19.0 20.0 18.3 $5,000 to $7,499 37.5 33.3 16.0 41.7 $7,500 to $9,999 25.0 14.3 8.0 16.7 $10,000 or more 25.0 10.7 4.0 13.3 \nAttained credential (among \nreceived training)\n1 64.9 78.6 62.7 \nHigh school diploma/equivalency 1.0 7.1 0.0 \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other college \ndegree 8.2 0.0 9.6 \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate 52.6 50.0 53.0 \nOther 3.1 21.4 0.0 \n \n \n1 Based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009. \n2 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. \n3 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2008 to December 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from July 2008 to June 2009. \n Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 180Table III-40 \nPerformance Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof Exiters Entered \nEmploy-\nment Rate \n(%) Credential \nAttainment\nRate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNumber of exiters 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847 \nStatewide programs Local programs 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847 National Emergency Grants \nDisaster Relief Othe\nr \nCharacteristics of All Exiters \nAge categories \nUnder 22 \n22 to 29 11 66.7 44.4 10 77.8 12,949 \n30 to 44 37 77.4 59.4 52 88.9 12,490 45 to 54 38 73.0 51.5 33 91.7 12\n,888\n55 and over 27 53.8 39.1 28 90.9 9,425 \nGender \nFemale 36 80.6 52.9 61 93.9 9,407 \nMale 77 63.9 49.2 64 84.6 14,398 \nIndividual with a disability 14 42.9 40.0 10 100.0 14,593 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan Native (only) \nAsian (only) \nBlack or African \nAmerican (only) \nHawaiian or other \nPacific Islander (only) \nWhite (only) 105 68.4 51.6 121 88.9 11,687 \nMore than one race \nVeteran Status \nVeteran 20 63.2 44.4 15 84.6 11,624 \nDisabled veteran \nCampaign veteran 13 69.2 58.3 9 87.5 10,192 \nRecently separated veteran Other eligible person Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 181 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof Exiters Entered \nEmploy-\nment Rate \n(%) Credential \nAttainment\nRate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNumber of exiters 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 14 92.3 11,039 \nNot employed or \nreceived layoff notice 106 68.9 49.5 111 88.6 11,971 \nAverage preprogram \nquarterly earnings \nNone \n$1 to $2,499 \n$2,500 to $4,999 10 55.6 22.2 22 90.0 7,853 $5,000 to $7,499 30 66.7 59.3 29 81.0 9,554 $7,500 to $9,999 30 66.7 53.8 33 92.3 13,886 $10,000 or more 36 73.5 41.4 28 92.0 14,882 \nDisplaced homemaker \nTime of participation \nBefore layoff 9 75.0 71.4 11 100.0 10,524 \nWithin 8 weeks of layoff 46 80.4 52.5 61 90.4 11,040 \nOver 8 weeks after layoff 58 58.5 46.0 53 84.2 13,487 \nCharacteristics of Exiters \nwho Received Intensive or \nTraining Services With \nIntensive \nor \nTraining \nServices \nLimited English-language \nproficiency \nSingle parent 10 75.0 40.0 10 100.0 13,040 \nUI Status \nClaimant 23 85.7 52.6 14 91.7 9,008 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS \nExhaustee \nHighest grade completed \n(avg.) \n8th or less \nSome high school 9 71.4 75.0 12 81.8 8,262 \nHigh school graduate 42 73.7 54.1 72 91.8 12,873 \nHigh school equivalency Some postsecondary 33 67.7 53.6 21 100.0 11,393 College graduate (4-year) 20 73.7 41.2 12 83.3 10,464 Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 182Table III-41 \nPerformance Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by Services Received \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof \nExiters Entered \nEmploy-\nment \nRate (%) Employment \nand \nCredential \nRate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nAll exiters 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847\nCoenrollment \nWIA adult \nWIA youth \nPartner program 41 75.7 56.8 60 91.5 13,134\nWagner-Peyser 39 77.1 60.0 48 92.5 12,999TAA 21 92.9 13,510National Farmworker Jobs Veterans programs \nVocational Education \nAdult Education Title V Older Worker Other partner programs \nServices Received \nRapid response \nDisaster relief \nCore self-service and \ninformational activities \nStaff-assisted core services 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847\nWorkforce information \nIntensive Services 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847\nPrevocational activities \nTraining services 100 69.9 50.5 115 88.2 11,437\nOn-the-job training 14 100.0 78.6 31 82.8 7,760Skill upgrading & retraining Entrepreneurial training \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training \nCustomized training \nOther occupational skills \ntraining 86 65.0 45.8 85 90.8 \n12,984\nNeeds-related payments \nOther supportive services 57 73.1 58.8 68 90.7 13,165\nPell Grant recipient Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 183 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof \nExiters Entered \nEmploy-\nment \nRate (%) Employment \nand \nCredential \nRate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nAll exiters 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847\nService category \nCore services, including staff \nassisted, onl y \nIntensive & core services only 13 60.0 10 100.0 16,045\nTraining services 100 69.9 50.5 115 88.2 11,437\nITA established 86 65.0 45.8 85 90.8 12,984\nWeeks participated (average) \n13 or fewer weeks 29 67.9 52.0 23 94.1 12,608\n14 to 26 weeks 35 70.0 44.4 41 94.6 10,71827 to 39 weeks 21 80.0 60.0 21 78.9 12,06840 to 52 weeks 9 71.4 13,300More than 52 weeks 20 50.0 38.9 31 90.5 12,730\nWeeks of training (average \namong with training) \n13 or fewer weeks 31 56.7 46.7 28 95.5 10,447\n14 to 26 weeks 32 82.1 50.0 37 87.5 11,55627 to 39 weeks 16 75.0 56.3 17 85.7 11,006\n40 to 52 weeks \nMore than 52 weeks 16 57.1 37.5 28 90.0 12,024\nOccupation of training \nManagerial, prof., technical \nService occupations Sales and clerical \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntrans\nportation, material movin g 28 88.5 7,181\nReason for exit \nInstitutionalized \nHealth/medical Deceased \nFamily care \nReserve called to active duty \nRelocated to mandated \nresidential \nprogram \nRetirement Dislocated Workers Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 184Table III-42 \nPerformance Outcomes of Dislocated Worker Exiters, by State \nExcludes Individuals Served Only by NEG Programs \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n \nNumber of \nExiters Entered \nEmploy-\nment Rate \n(%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof Exiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNation 406,493 51.0 51.9 288,981 80.1 16,818 \nAlabama 908 72.4 49.3 883 86.6 13,855 Alaska 293 75.4 62.0 323 87.5 24,785 Arizona 1,786 76.5 72.1 1,651 85.7 14,347 Arkansas 418 92.9 84.3 300 97.0 13,635 \nCalifornia 24,079 54.7 44.9 14,768 88.2 17,318 \nColorado 662 82.7 31.2 707 86.6 16,503 Connecticut 779 70.5 52.3 482 91.3 15,344 Delaware 176 77.7 49.7 131 84.0 13,887 District of Columbia 44 52.4 45.0 37 82.6 20,075 Florida 2,173 75.2 59.3 2,297 86.8 16,667 \nGeorgia 2,013 73.3 61.5 2,151 85.6 13,874 \nHawaii 343 77.4 66.0 373 93.7 15,734 Idaho 467 84.5 60.5 385 89.8 15,472 Illinois 4,542 77.5 60.1 5,216 85.7 15,727 Indiana 20,572 50.0 35.4 9,823 79.2 13,664 Iowa 1,678 75.3 53.0 982 96.4 13,283 \nKansas 1,313 68.5 972 93.3 15,759 \nKentucky 1,534 77.7 58.0 1,592 89.0 13,309 Louisiana 6,207 64.6 48.1 3,867 78.3 16,004 Maine 516 82.5 56.2 427 85.6 11,953 Maryland 1,245 85.0 80.2 1,172 90.7 16,650 Massachusetts 3,302 79. 0 76.7 3,136 84.7 16,653 \nMichigan 4,628 92.3 85.4 4,536 90.0 13,082 \nMinnesota 2,115 89.9 65.9 1,694 87.9 18,173 Mississippi 12,839 58.2 49.8 16,426 78.1 12,455 Missouri 2,462 79.7 20.6 2,184 88.0 13,746 Montana 367 91.5 33.1 280 86.6 14,629 Nebraska 322 87.1 63.1 245 92.3 12,684 \nNevada 740 70.4 55.0 551 78.0 14,858 \nNew Hampshire 504 77.3 75.9 437 83.9 15,018 Vermont Dislocated Workers \nSocial Policy Research Associates 185 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n \nNumber of \nExiters Entered \nEmploy-\nment Rate \n(%) Credential \nAttainmentR\nate (%) Number \nof Exiters Retention \n2nd and 3rd \nQuarters \n(%) Average \nEarnings \n($) \nNew Jersey 2,720 82.3 64.1 3,236 85.3 15,794 \nNew Mexico 298 73.3 58.1 251 92.4 16,367 New York 193,476 42.6 33.4 144,855 74.6 19,935 North Carolina 2,430 74.4 54.3 2,222 87.8 13,559 North Dakota 177 81.5 11.7 127 84.8 14,834 \nOhio 5,412 68.0 52.3 4,430 86.3 17,100 \nOklahoma 8,187 40.7 40.5 1,000 82.2 14,117 Oregon 61,037 43.6 20.0 24,980 73.0 13,352 Pennsylvania 5,993 68.9 43.9 5,405 87.1 14,465 Puerto Rico 2,105 88.4 83.5 1,683 88.1 7,094 Rhode Island 883 60.2 48.6 463 83.8 15,608 \nSouth Carolina 6,340 60.4 33.4 4,718 85.3 12,395 \nSouth Dakota 258 92.6 57.5 177 93.1 14,439 Tennessee 2,925 82.9 67.3 2,872 87.2 13,412 Texas 7,069 72.2 53.6 6,028 87.6 15,714 Utah 407 80.3 38.0 302 85.5 14,401 Vermont 113 68.9 50.5 125 89.1 11,847 \nVirgin Islands 120 37.0 5.5 104 82.6 11,705 \nVirginia 1,937 78.5 58.6 1,942 88.0 12,930 Washington 2,413 84.1 60.6 2,536 87.3 18,726 West Virginia 764 78.6 58.8 781 92.5 13,608 Wisconsin 2,385 80.4 50.8 2,711 88.7 14,151 Wyoming 17 81.3 76.9 \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates 186 \n Social Policy Research Associates 187 \n \n \nPart IV \nYouth Exiters Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 188Table IV-1 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 120,226 110,770 119,969 310 269 261\nStatewide programs 12,304 10,203 9,955 0 0 0\nLocal programs 112,360 105,395 115,131 310 269 261\nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.1 12.6 10.6 29.7 21.6 13.4 \n16 to 17 40.9 40.1 39.1 41.6 40.9 42.1 \n18 18.3 19.9 20.5 13.2 18.6 21.8 \n19 to 21 27.6 27.5 29.8 15.5 19.0 22.6 \nGender \nFemale 56.0 55.7 55.5 40.3 40.5 45.6 \nMale 44.0 44.3 44.5 59.7 59.5 54.4 \nIndividual with a disability 14.6 13.6 12.9 78.7 74.3 69.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 34.0 32.9 31.8 3.2 4.1 2.3 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or \nAlaskan Native (only) 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.3 0.0 0.4 \nAsian (only) 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.3 1.9 0.8 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 32.0 32.7 33.7 5.5 3.7 3.8 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.4 \nWhite (only) 29.3 29.6 29.8 89.7 90.0 92.3 \nMore than one race 1.4 1.6 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 10.0 10.0 9.3 1.0 2.6 2.7 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 90.0 90.0 90.7 99.0 97.4 97.3 \nHomeless or runaway youth 2.7 2.7 2.7 8.7 13.8 22.6 \nOffender 8.0 7.7 7.5 33.2 33.8 44.8 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.1 13.6 13.6 7.4 13.8 14.2 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 58.4 56.2 55.1 47.7 57.2 41.8 \nEver in foster care 3.8 3.4 3.4 22.3 22.3 22.2 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 189 Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 120,226 110,770 119,969 310 269 261\nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 56.4 57.4 58.0 98.4 99.3 99.2 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,806 $1,900 $1,872 $1,045 $1,729 $1,444\nNone 40.2 40.0 42.9 54.2 41.2 47.9 \n$1 to $1,499 31.4 30.4 29.6 37.5 33.3 31.3 $1,500 to $2,999 17.9 18.3 16.9 4.2 9.8 12.5 $3,000 to $4,999 8.1 8.6 8.0 4.2 13.7 6.3 \n$5,000 or more 2.3 2.8 2.6 0.0 2.0 2.1 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 12.2 11.8 10.0 3.9 4.5 3.1 \nSingle parent 10.4 9.8 9.6 6.5 8.2 8.8 \nUI status \nClaimant 2.7 2.0 2.2 0.6 0.4 0.8 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 95.1 94.8 95.0 98.1 98.5 97.7 \nPublic assistance recipient 30.3 32.1 33.7 18.1 18.2 16.5 \nTANF recipient 8.2 8.0 7.3 14.2 16.7 15.3 \nOther public assistance 28.3 30.5 32.1 7.4 6.3 6.9 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.4 10.4 10.5 9.7 9.9 10.2 \n8\nth or less 11.9 11.3 9.9 24.5 19.0 14.6 \nSome high school 66.4 67.4 66.6 65.2 66.9 67.0 \nHigh school graduate 16.6 16.3 17.9 8.4 11.9 12.6 \nHigh school equivalency 2.3 2.4 2.5 1.0 1.9 5.0 Some postsecondary 2.8 2.6 3.0 0.3 0.4 0.4 College graduate (4-year) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.4 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 56.8 56.4 55.6 69.4 56.5 44.1 \nHigh school or below 51.0 50.6 49.3 68.1 56.1 42.9 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 3.8 3.5 4.0 1.3 0.4 1.1 \nNot attending school 43.2 43.6 44.4 30.6 43.5 55.9 \nHigh school dropout 25.3 25.9 25.0 21.6 29.7 38.7 \nHigh school \ngraduate/equiv. 17.8 17.7 19.3 9.0 13.8 17.2 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 190Table IV-2 \nNumber of Youth Exiters, by Characteristics, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 120,226 110,770 119,969 310 269 261 \nStatewide programs 12,304 10,203 9,955 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 112,360 105,395 115,131 310 269 261 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 15,766 13,902 12,769 92 58 35 \n16 to 17 49,207 44,380 46,904 129 110 110 \n18 22,019 22,010 24,575 41 50 57 \n19 to 21 33,234 30,478 35,721 48 51 59 \nGender \nFemale 67,232 61,695 66,515 125 109 119 \nMale 52,911 48,995 53,345 185 160 142 \nIndividual with a disability 16,671 14,541 15,105 244 200 180 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 40,059 35,793 37,474 10 11 6 \nNot Hispanic American Indian or \n Alaskan Native (only) 1,616 1,278 1,359 4 0 1 \n Asian (only) 1,961 1,880 2,098 1 5 2 \n Black or African \n American (only) 37,799 35,601 39,686 17 10 10 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 333 313 344 0 1 1 \n White (only) 34,573 32,196 35,059 278 242 241 \n More than one race 1,620 1,693 1,822 0 0 0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 117 106 108 0 0 0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 11,996 11,108 11,135 3 7 7 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 108,230 99,662 108,834 307 262 254 \nHomeless or runaway youth 3,205 2,942 3,275 27 37 59 \nOffender 9,678 8,533 8,985 103 91 117 \nPregnant or parenting youth 16,945 15,007 16,219 23 37 37 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 67,887 61,600 65,648 148 154 109 \nEver in foster care 4,566 3,757 4,101 69 60 58 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 191 Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 120,226 110,770 119,969 310 269 269 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 67,770 63,511 69,394 305 267 259 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) \nNone 12,145 11,278 10,675 26 21 23 \n$1 to $1,499 9,485 8,549 7,363 18 17 15 $1,500 to $2,999 5,416 5,148 4,213 2 5 6 $3,000 to $4,999 2,451 2,413 1,984 2 7 3 \n$5,000 or more 697 776 649 0 1 1 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 14,566 13,007 11,997 12 12 8 \nSingle parent 12,551 10,812 11,488 20 22 23 \nUI status \nClaimant 3,190 2,191 2,677 2 1 2 \nClaimant referred by \nWPRS 433 383 476 0 0 0 \nExhaustee 568 433 346 0 0 0 \nLow income 111,791 104,281 113,248 304 265 255 \nPublic assistance recipient 36,468 35,600 40,359 56 49 43 \nTANF recipient 8,356 7,567 7,600 44 45 40 \nOther public assistance 34,081 33,824 38,495 23 17 18 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) \n8\nth or less 14,249 12,531 11,879 76 51 38 \nSome high school 79,508 74,561 79,778 202 180 175 \nHigh school graduate 19,841 18,081 21,416 26 32 33 \nHigh school equivalency 2,745 2,610 2,989 3 5 13 Some postsecondary 3,314 2,834 3,640 1 1 1 College graduate (4-year) 80 34 54 2 0 1 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 68,288 62,342 66,412 215 152 115 \nHigh school or below 61,297 55,959 58,814 211 151 112 Alternative school 2,465 2,483 2,851 0 0 0 Postsecondary 4,526 3,900 4,747 4 1 3 \nNot attending school 51,859 48,205 52,942 95 117 146 \nHigh school dropout 30,435 28,668 29,866 67 80 101 \nHigh school \ngraduate/equiv. 21,424 19,537 23,076 28 37 45 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 192Table IV-3 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n All 14 to 15 16 to 17 18 19 to 21 \nNumber of exiters 261 35 110 57 59 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 261 35 110 57 59 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.4 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \n16 to 17 42.1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 18 21.8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 19 to 21 22.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 \nGender \nFemale 45.6 25.7 44.5 59.6 45.8 \nMale 54.4 74.3 55.5 40.4 54.2 \nIndividual with a disability 69.0 71.4 69.1 66.7 69.5 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.3 0.0 1.8 3.5 3.4 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.4 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.8 2.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.8 5.7 2.7 5.3 3.4 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 \nWhite (only) 92.3 88.6 94.5 91.2 91.5 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 2.9 2.7 1.8 3.4 \nNot employed or received layoff \nnotice 97.3 97.1 97.3 98.2 96.6 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.6 8.6 20.0 19.3 39.0 \nOffender 44.8 31.4 40.0 42.1 64.4 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.2 2.9 10.9 12.3 28.8 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.8 62.9 43.6 43.9 23.7 \nEver in foster care 22.2 22.9 22.7 17.5 25.4 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 193 Age at Participation \n All 14 to 15 16 to 17 18 19 to 21 \nNumber of exiters 261 35 110 57 59 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 99.2 100.0 99.1 98.2 100.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,444 $1,444 \nNone 47.9 47.9 \n$1 to $1,499 31.3 31.3 $1,500 to $2,999 12.5 12.5 \n$3,000 to $4,999 6.3 6.3 \n$5,000 or more 2.1 2.1 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.1 5.7 2.7 3.5 1.7 \nSingle parent 8.8 5.7 8.2 8.8 11.9 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.7 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.7 94.3 98.2 98.2 98.3 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.5 22.9 18.2 14.0 11.9 \nTANF recipient 15.3 20.0 18.2 10.5 11.9 \nOther public assistance 6.9 11.4 7.3 7.0 3.4 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 8.2 9.9 11.1 11.0 \n8\nth or less 14.6 62.9 10.0 1.8 6.8 \nSome high school 67.0 37.1 85.5 73.7 44.1 \nHigh school graduate 12.6 0.0 2.7 19.3 32.2 \nHigh school equivalency 5.0 0.0 1.8 1.8 16.9 Some postsecondary 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 College graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.1 100.0 50.9 24.6 16.9 \nHigh school or below 42.9 100.0 50.9 21.1 15.3 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 1.1 0.0 0.0 3.5 1.7 \nNot attending school 55.9 0.0 49.1 75.4 83.1 \nHigh school dropout 38.7 0.0 44.5 54.4 35.6 \nHigh school graduate/equiv. 17.2 0.0 4.5 21.1 47.5 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 194Table IV-4 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 255 10 241 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 Local programs 255 10 241 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.7 20.0 12.9 \n16 to 17 42.4 30.0 43.2 18 21.6 30.0 21.6 19 to 21 22.4 20.0 22.4 \nGender \nFemale 45.9 20.0 47.3 \nMale 54.1 80.0 52.7 \nIndividual with a disability 69.4 30.0 70.5 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.8 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.9 100.0 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 94.5 0.0 100.0 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 0.0 2.9 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 97.3 100.0 97.1 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.4 10.0 22.8 \nOffender 44.7 50.0 44.0 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.5 20.0 14.5 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.6 70.0 40.2 \nEver in foster care 22.7 0.0 23.7 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 195 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 0 255 10 241 0 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 99.2 100.0 99.2 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,499 $3,909 $1,280 \nNone 47.8 0.0 48.8 \n$1 to $1,500 30.4 0.0 32.6 $1,500 to $2,999 13.0 50.0 11.6 \n$3,000 to $4,999 6.5 0.0 7.0 \n$5,000 or more 2.2 50.0 0.0 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.1 30.0 2.1 \nSingle parent 9.0 10.0 9.1 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.0 0.8 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.6 90.0 97.9 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.9 20.0 17.0 \nTANF recipient 15.7 20.0 15.8 \nOther public assistance 7.1 20.0 6.6 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 10.0 10.2 \n8\nth or less 14.5 20.0 13.7 \nSome high school 66.7 70.0 66.8 \nHigh school graduate 12.9 10.0 13.3 \nHigh school equivalency 5.1 0.0 5.4 Some postsecondary 0.4 0.0 0.4 College graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.0 0.4 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.3 40.0 44.4 \nHigh school or below 43.1 40.0 43.2 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 1.2 0.0 1.2 \nNot attending school 55.7 60.0 55.6 \nHigh school dropout 38.0 50.0 37.3 \nHigh school graduate/equiv. 17.6 10.0 18.3 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 196Table IV-5 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Gender and Disability \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Gender With a \nDisability Ever in \nFoster Care All Exiters Male Female \nNumber of exiters 261 142 119 180 58 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 261 142 119 180 58 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.4 18.3 7.6 13.9 13.8 \n16 to 17 42.1 43.0 41.2 42.2 43.1 18 21.8 16.2 28.6 21.1 17.2 19 to 21 22.6 22.5 22.7 22.8 25.9 \nGender \nFemale 45.6 0.0 100.0 42.2 53.4 \nMale 54.4 100.0 0.0 57.8 46.6 \nIndividual with a disability 69.0 73.2 63.9 100.0 82.8 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.3 2.8 1.7 1.7 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.8 0.7 0.8 1.1 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.8 5.6 1.7 1.7 0.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.6 1.7 \nWhite (only) 92.3 89.4 95.8 94.4 98.3 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 2.1 3.4 1.7 1.7 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 97.3 97.9 96.6 98.3 98.3 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.6 15.5 31.1 22.2 22.4 \nOffender 44.8 51.4 37.0 47.2 60.3 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.2 7.0 22.7 10.0 12.1 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.8 38.7 45.4 46.1 43.1 \nEver in foster care 22.2 19.0 26.1 26.7 100.0 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 197 Gender With a \nDisability Ever in \nFoster Care All Exiters Male Female \nNumber of exiters 261 142 119 180 58 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 99.2 99.3 99.2 98.9 100.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,444 $1,821 $963 $1,287 $984 \nNone 47.9 41.7 54.2 57.6 42.9 \n$1 to $1,499 31.3 25.0 37.5 24.2 50.0 $1,500 to $2,999 12.5 20.8 4.2 12.1 0.0 \n$3,000 to $4,999 6.3 8.3 4.2 6.1 7.1 \n$5,000 or more 2.1 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.1 4.2 1.7 1.7 3.4 \nSingle parent 8.8 4.9 13.4 5.6 6.9 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.0 1.7 0.6 1.7 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.7 98.6 96.6 98.3 98.3 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.5 15.5 17.6 14.4 17.2 \nTANF recipient 15.3 13.4 17.6 13.9 15.5 \nOther public assistance 6.9 9.2 4.2 5.0 5.2 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 9.9 10.5 10.2 10.1 \n8\nth or less 14.6 18.3 10.1 13.3 10.3 \nSome high school 67.0 66.9 67.2 70.0 72.4 \nHigh school graduate 12.6 9.2 16.8 11.7 10.3 \nHigh school equivalency 5.0 4.9 5.0 4.4 6.9 Some postsecondary 0.4 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 College graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.1 54.9 31.1 47.2 56.9 \nHigh school or below 42.9 53.5 30.3 46.1 56.9 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 1.1 1.4 0.8 1.1 0.0 \nNot attending school 55.9 45.1 68.9 52.8 43.1 \nHigh school dropout 38.7 31.7 47.1 37.2 25.9 \nHigh school graduate/equiv. 17.2 13.4 21.8 15.6 17.2 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 198Table IV-6 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation and Basic Skills Deficiency \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \nAll Exiters Employed at participation Basic Skills Deficient \n Yes No Yes No \nNumber of exiters 261 254 109 152 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 Local programs 261 254 109 152 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.4 13.4 20.2 8.6 \n16 to 17 42.1 42.1 44.0 40.8 18 21.8 22.0 22.9 21.1 19 to 21 22.6 22.4 12.8 29.6 \nGender \nFemale 45.6 45.3 49.5 42.8 \nMale 54.4 54.7 50.5 57.2 \nIndividual with a disability 69.0 69.7 76.1 63.8 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.3 2.4 2.8 2.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.7 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.8 3.9 6.4 2.0 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.7 \nWhite (only) 92.3 92.1 89.0 94.7 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 0.0 3.7 2.0 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 97.3 100.0 96.3 98.0 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.6 22.4 16.5 27.0 \nOffender 44.8 45.7 39.4 48.7 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.2 13.8 15.6 13.2 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.8 41.3 100.0 0.0 \nEver in foster care 22.2 22.4 22.9 21.7 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 199 \nAll Exiters Employed at participation Basic Skills Deficient \n Yes No Yes No \nNumber of exiters 261 0 254 109 152 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 99.2 99.2 99.1 99.3 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,444 $1,429 $2,480 $1,185 \nNone 47.9 47.8 61.5 42.9 \n$1 to $1,499 31.3 32.6 15.4 37.1 $1,500 to $2,999 12.5 10.9 7.7 14.3 \n$3,000 to $4,999 6.3 6.5 7.7 5.7 \n$5,000 or more 2.1 2.2 7.7 0.0 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.1 2.8 7.3 0.0 \nSingle parent 8.8 8.3 8.3 9.2 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.8 0.0 1.3 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.7 97.6 98.2 97.4 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.5 16.5 22.0 12.5 \nTANF recipient 15.3 15.4 20.2 11.8 \nOther public assistance 6.9 6.7 11.0 3.9 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 10.2 9.8 10.5 \n8\nth or less 14.6 14.2 23.9 7.9 \nSome high school 67.0 67.7 70.6 64.5 \nHigh school graduate 12.6 12.2 3.7 19.1 \nHigh school equivalency 5.0 5.1 0.9 7.9 Some postsecondary 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.7 College graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.0 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.1 43.7 60.6 32.2 \nHigh school or below 42.9 42.5 59.6 30.9 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 1.1 1.2 0.9 1.3 \nNot attending school 55.9 56.3 39.4 67.8 \nHigh school dropout 38.7 39.4 34.9 41.4 \nHigh school graduate/equiv. 17.2 16.9 4.6 26.3 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 200Table IV-7 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by School Status at Participation \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Attending School Not Attending School \n \nAll Exiters High School \nor Below Post-\nsecondary High School \nDropout High School \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 261 112 101 45 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 Local programs 261 112 101 45 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.4 31.3 0.0 0.0 \n16 to 17 42.1 50.0 48.5 11.1 18 21.8 10.7 30.7 26.7 19 to 21 22.6 8.0 20.8 62.2 \nGender \nFemale 45.6 32.1 55.4 57.8 \nMale 54.4 67.9 44.6 42.2 \nIndividual with a disability 69.0 74.1 66.3 62.2 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.3 1.8 4.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 3.8 3.6 5.0 2.2 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.4 0.0 1.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 92.3 92.9 89.1 97.8 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 3.6 1.0 4.4 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 97.3 96.4 99.0 95.6 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.6 12.5 28.7 35.6 \nOffender 44.8 41.1 46.5 53.3 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.2 11.6 14.9 17.8 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.8 58.0 37.6 11.1 \nEver in foster care 22.2 29.5 14.9 22.2 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 201 Attending School Not Attending School \n \nAll Exiters High School \nor Below Post-\nsecondary High School \nDropout High School \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 261 112 0 101 45 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 99.2 99.1 99.0 100.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,444 $1,417 $1,883 $1,251 \nNone 47.9 71.4 43.8 45.8 \n$1 to $1,499 31.3 14.3 37.5 29.2 \n$1,500 to $2,999 12.5 14.3 0.0 20.8 \n$3,000 to $4,999 6.3 0.0 12.5 4.2 $5,000 or more 2.1 0.0 6.3 0.0 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 3.1 6.3 1.0 0.0 \nSingle parent 8.8 8.0 8.9 8.9 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.0 1.0 2.2 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.7 97.3 97.0 100.0 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.5 23.2 12.9 6.7 \nTANF recipient 15.3 21.4 12.9 4.4 Other public assistance 6.9 9.8 5.9 2.2 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 9.5 10.1 12.0 \n8\nth or less 14.6 25.0 9.9 0.0 \nSome high school 67.0 75.0 90.1 0.0 \nHigh school graduate 12.6 0.0 0.0 71.1 \nHigh school equivalency 5.0 0.0 0.0 28.9 Some postsecondary 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.1 100.0 0.0 0.0 \nHigh school or below 42.9 100.0 0.0 0.0 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNot attending school 55.9 0.0 100.0 100.0 \nHigh school dropout 38.7 0.0 100.0 0.0 High school graduate/equiv. 17.2 0.0 0.0 100.0 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 202Table IV-8 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nOut-of-School and In-School Youth at Participation \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Out of School In School \n \n \nAll High \nSchool \nDropout High \nSchool \nGraduate Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Basic \nSkills Deficient Attending \nHigh School \nor Alternative \nSchool Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Not Basic \nSkills Deficient \nNumber of exiters 147 101 45 112 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 Local programs 147 101 45 112 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.3 \n16 to 17 36.7 48.5 11.1 50.0 18 29.9 30.7 26.7 10.7 19 to 21 33.3 20.8 62.2 8.0 \nGender \nFemale 55.8 55.4 57.8 32.1 \nMale 44.2 44.6 42.2 67.9 \nIndividual with a disability 65.3 66.3 62.2 74.1 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.7 4.0 0.0 1.8 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 \nAsian (only) 0.7 1.0 0.0 0.9 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 4.1 5.0 2.2 3.6 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.7 1.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 91.8 89.1 97.8 92.9 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.0 1.0 4.4 3.6 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 98.0 99.0 95.6 96.4 \nHomeless or runaway youth 30.6 28.7 35.6 12.5 \nOffender 48.3 46.5 53.3 41.1 \nPregnant or parenting youth 15.6 14.9 17.8 11.6 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 29.9 37.6 11.1 58.0 \nEver in foster care 17.0 14.9 22.2 29.5 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 203 Out of School In School \n \n \nAll High \nSchool \nDropout High \nSchool \nGraduate Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Basic \nSkills Deficient Attending \nHigh School \nor Alternative \nSchool Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Not Basic \nSkills Deficient \nNumber of exiters 147 101 45 0 112 0 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 99.3 99.0 100.0 99.1 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,510 $1,883 $1,251 $1,417 \nNone 45.0 43.8 45.8 71.4 \n$1 to $1,499 32.5 37.5 29.2 14.3 \n$1,500 to $2,999 12.5 0.0 20.8 14.3 \n$3,000 to $4,999 7.5 12.5 4.2 0.0 $5,000 or more 2.5 6.3 0.0 0.0 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 0.7 1.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 \nSingle parent 8.8 8.9 8.9 8.0 \nUI status \nClaimant 1.4 1.0 2.2 0.0 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 98.0 97.0 100.0 97.3 \nPublic assistance recipient 10.9 12.9 6.7 23.2 \nTANF recipient 10.2 12.9 4.4 21.4 \nOther public assistance 4.8 5.9 2.2 9.8 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.7 10.1 12.0 9.5 \n8\nth or less 6.8 9.9 0.0 25.0 \nSome high school 61.9 90.1 0.0 75.0 \nHigh school graduate 21.8 0.0 71.1 0.0 \nHigh school equivalency 8.8 0.0 28.9 0.0 Some postsecondary 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 0.7 0.0 0.0 100.0 \nHigh school or below 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNot attending school 99.3 100.0 100.0 0.0 \nHigh school dropout 68.7 100.0 0.0 0.0 High school graduate/equiv. 30.6 0.0 100.0 0.0 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 204Table IV-9 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Barriers to Employment \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Homeless \nor \nRunaway \nOffender \nPregnant or \nParenting Needs \nAdditional \nAssistance \nNumber of exiters 261 59 117 37 259 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 \nLocal programs 261 59 117 37 259 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.4 5.1 9.4 2.7 13.5 \n16 to 17 42.1 37.3 37.6 32.4 42.1 \n18 21.8 18.6 20.5 18.9 21.6 \n19 to 21 22.6 39.0 32.5 45.9 22.8 \nGender \nFemale 45.6 62.7 37.6 73.0 45.6 \nMale 54.4 37.3 62.4 27.0 54.4 \nIndividual with a disability 69.0 67.8 72.6 48.6 68.7 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.3 3.4 2.6 0.0 2.3 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan Native \n(only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 \nAsian (only) 0.8 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.8 \nBlack or African American (only) 3.8 1.7 4.3 5.4 3.9 Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander \n(only) 0.4 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.4 \nWhite (only) 92.3 93.2 90.6 94.6 92.3 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 3.4 0.9 5.4 2.7 \nNot employed or received layoff notice 97.3 96.6 99.1 94.6 97.3 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.6 100.0 27.4 13.5 22.8 \nOffender 44.8 54.2 100.0 43.2 44.4 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.2 8.5 13.7 100.0 14.3 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.8 30.5 36.8 45.9 41.7 \nEver in foster care 22.2 22.0 29.9 18.9 22.4 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 205 \nAll Exiters Homeless \nor \nRunaway \nOffender \nPregnant or \nParenting Needs \nAdditional \nAssistance \nNumber of exiters 261 59 117 37 259 \nYouth who needs additional assistance 99.2 100.0 98.3 100.0 100.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly earnings \n(among age 19 to 21) $1,444 $1,515 $1,607 $2,030 $1,444 \nNone 47.9 52.6 43.3 42.9 47.9 \n$1 to $1,499 31.3 26.3 33.3 28.6 31.3 $1,500 to $2,999 12.5 15.8 13.3 14.3 12.5 $3,000 to $4,999 6.3 5.3 6.7 7.1 6.3 $5,000 or more 2.1 0.0 3.3 7.1 2.1 \nLimited English-language proficiency 3.1 0.0 2.6 8.1 3.1 \nSingle parent 8.8 5.1 8.5 54.1 8.9 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.8 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.7 98.3 99.1 97.3 97.7 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.5 11.9 15.4 40.5 16.6 \nTANF recipient 15.3 11.9 14.5 40.5 15.4 Other public assistance 6.9 1.7 2.6 10.8 6.9 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 10.5 10.2 10.5 10.2 \n8\nth or less 14.6 6.8 11.1 10.8 14.7 \nSome high school 67.0 66.1 68.4 64.9 66.8 \nHigh school graduate 12.6 23.7 12.0 10.8 12.7 \nHigh school equivalency 5.0 3.4 8.5 10.8 5.0 \nSome postsecondary 0.4 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.4 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.1 23.7 39.3 37.8 44.0 \nHigh school or below 42.9 23.7 39.3 35.1 42.9 \nAlternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nPostsecondary 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.7 1.2 \nNot attending school 55.9 76.3 60.7 62.2 56.0 \nHigh school dropout 38.7 49.2 40.2 40.5 38.6 High school graduate/equiv. 17.2 27.1 20.5 21.6 17.4 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 206Table IV-10 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Low Income and Public Assistance \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Public Assistance \n All Exiters Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 261 255 43 40 18 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 261 255 43 40 18 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.4 12.9 18.6 17.5 22.2 \n16 to 17 42.1 42.4 46.5 50.0 44.4 18 21.8 22.0 18.6 15.0 22.2 19 to 21 22.6 22.7 16.3 17.5 11.1 \nGender \nFemale 45.6 45.1 48.8 52.5 27.8 \nMale 54.4 54.9 51.2 47.5 72.2 \nIndividual with a disability 69.0 69.4 60.5 62.5 50.0 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.3 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan Native \n(only) 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAsian (only) 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nBlack or African American (only) 3.8 3.5 4.7 5.0 11.1 Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (only) 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 92.3 92.5 95.3 95.0 88.9 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.5 5.6 \nNot employed or received layoff notice 97.3 97.3 97.7 97.5 94.4 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.6 22.7 16.3 17.5 5.6 \nOffender 44.8 45.5 41.9 42.5 16.7 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.2 14.1 34.9 37.5 22.2 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.8 42.0 55.8 55.0 66.7 \nEver in foster care 22.2 22.4 23.3 22.5 16.7 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 207 Public Assistance \n All Exiters Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 261 255 43 40 18 \nYouth who needs additional assistance 99.2 99.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly earnings \n(among age 19 to 21) $1,444 $1,444 $2,865 $2,865 $3,109 \nNone 47.9 46.8 25.0 25.0 0.0 \n$1 to $1,499 31.3 31.9 25.0 25.0 50.0 $1,500 to $2,999 12.5 12.8 25.0 25.0 0.0 $3,000 to $4,999 6.3 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \n$5,000 or more 2.1 2.1 25.0 25.0 50.0 \nLimited English-language proficiency 3.1 2.7 9.3 10.0 16.7 \nSingle parent 8.8 9.0 25.6 27.5 16.7 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.5 16.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 \nTANF recipient 15.3 15.7 93.0 100.0 83.3 Other public assistance 6.9 7.1 41.9 37.5 100.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 10.2 9.5 9.4 9.4 \n8\nth or less 14.6 14.1 27.9 30.0 27.8 \nSome high school 67.0 67.1 62.8 62.5 66.7 \nHigh school graduate 12.6 12.9 7.0 5.0 5.6 \nHigh school equivalency 5.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSome postsecondary 0.4 0.4 2.3 2.5 0.0 College graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.1 43.9 62.8 62.5 61.1 \nHigh school or below 42.9 42.7 60.5 60.0 61.1 \nAlternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 1.1 1.2 2.3 2.5 0.0 \nNot attending school 55.9 56.1 37.2 37.5 38.9 \nHigh school dropout 38.7 38.4 30.2 32.5 33.3 High school graduate/equiv. 17.2 17.6 7.0 5.0 5.6 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 208Table IV-11 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n All \nExiters Limited English-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell \nGrant \nRecipient Basic \nSkills \nDeficient \nNumber of exiters 261 23 109 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 Local programs 261 23 109 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 13.4 8.7 20.2 \n16 to 17 42.1 39.1 44.0 \n18 21.8 21.7 22.9 19 to 21 22.6 30.4 12.8 \nGender \nFemale 45.6 69.6 49.5 \nMale 54.4 30.4 50.5 \nIndividual with a disability 69.0 43.5 76.1 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 2.3 0.0 2.8 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan Native \n(only) 0.4 0.0 0.9 \nAsian (only) 0.8 0.0 0.9 \nBlack or African American (only) 3.8 4.3 6.4 Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (only) 0.4 0.0 0.0 White (only) 92.3 95.7 89.0 More than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 8.7 3.7 \nNot employed or received layoff notice 97.3 91.3 96.3 \nHomeless or runaway youth 22.6 13.0 16.5 \nOffender 44.8 43.5 39.4 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14.2 87.0 15.6 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 41.8 39.1 100.0 \nEver in foster care 22.2 17.4 22.9 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 209 All \nExiters Limited English-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell \nGrant \nRecipient Basic \nSkills \nDeficient \nNumber of exiters 261 0 23 0 109 \nYouth who needs additional assistance 99.2 100.0 99.1 \nAverage preprogram quarterly earnings \n(among age 19 to 21) $1,444 $1,358 $2,480 \nNone 47.9 33.3 61.5 \n$1 to $1,499 31.3 33.3 15.4 $1,500 to $2,999 12.5 33.3 7.7 $3,000 to $4,999 6.3 0.0 7.7 $5,000 or more 2.1 0.0 7.7 \nLimited English-language proficiency 3.1 8.7 7.3 \nSingle parent 8.8 100.0 8.3 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.8 0.0 0.0 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 97.7 100.0 98.2 \nPublic assistance recipient 16.5 47.8 22.0 \nTANF recipient 15.3 47.8 20.2 Other public assistance 6.9 13.0 11.0 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 10.2 10.3 9.8 \n8\nth or less 14.6 17.4 23.9 \nSome high school 67.0 60.9 70.6 \nHigh school graduate 12.6 8.7 3.7 \nHigh school equivalency 5.0 8.7 0.9 \nSome postsecondary 0.4 4.3 0.0 \nCollege graduate (4-year) 0.4 0.0 0.9 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 44.1 43.5 60.6 \nHigh school or below 42.9 39.1 59.6 \nAlternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nPostsecondary 1.1 4.3 0.9 \nNot attending school 55.9 56.5 39.4 \nHigh school dropout 38.7 39.1 34.9 High school graduate/equiv. 17.2 17.4 4.6 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 210Table IV-12 \nCharacteristics of Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Youth Activities \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Educational \nAchievement \nServices \nEmployment \nServices Summer \nEmployment \nOpportunities Leadership \nDevelopment \nOpportunities Additional \nSupport \nfor Youth \nNumber of exiters 187 193 142 123 177 \nStatewide programs 0 0 0 0 0 Local programs 187 193 142 123 177 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 17.1 13.0 23.2 23.6 16.4 \n16 to 17 40.6 39.9 42.3 39.0 39.5 \n18 23.0 23.3 19.7 17.1 20.3 19 to 21 19.3 23.8 14.8 20.3 23.7 \nGender \nFemale 42.8 47.7 40.8 33.3 42.9 \nMale 57.2 52.3 59.2 66.7 57.1 \nIndividual with a disability 70.1 68.9 73.2 66.7 68.4 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 3.2 2.6 2.1 2.4 1.7 \nNot Hispanic \nAmerican Indian or Alaskan \nNative (only) 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.6 \nAsian (only) 1.1 1.0 0.7 1.6 1.1 \nBlack or African American \n(only) 4.3 2.6 2.1 4.9 4.5 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 \nWhite (only) 90.4 93.3 93.7 90.2 92.1 \nMore than one race 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed 2.7 3.6 2.1 3.3 4.0 \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 97.3 96.4 97.9 96.7 96.0 \nHomeless or runaway youth 21.4 23.8 15.5 17.1 25.4 \nOffender 46.0 43.5 39.4 47.2 45.2 \nPregnant or parenting youth 12.8 13.0 12.7 11.4 14.7 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 51.3 42.5 44.4 44.7 43.5 \nEver in foster care 20.9 18.1 23.9 20.3 20.3 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 211 Educational \nAchievement \nServices \nEmployment \nServices Summer \nEmployment \nOpportunities Leadership \nDevelopment \nOpportunities Additional \nSupport \nfor Youth \nNumber of exiters 187 193 142 123 177 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 98.9 99.5 100.0 99.2 98.9 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) $1,839 $1,510 $956 $1,727 $1,690 \nNone 53.6 47.2 50.0 42.1 51.5 \n$1 to $1,499 25.0 30.6 37.5 31.6 27.3 $1,500 to $2,999 10.7 13.9 6.3 15.8 12.1 $3,000 to $4,999 7.1 5.6 6.3 5.3 6.1 \n$5,000 or more 3.6 2.8 0.0 5.3 3.0 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 4.3 2.6 2.8 5.7 4.5 \nSingle parent 8.0 8.8 9.2 6.5 9.0 \nUI status \nClaimant 0.5 1.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 \nClaimant referred by WPRS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nExhaustee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLow income 96.8 98.4 97.2 96.7 96.6 \nPublic assistance recipient 18.7 14.0 21.1 17.1 18.1 \nTANF recipient 17.6 13.5 19.7 17.1 18.1 \nOther public assistance 8.6 6.2 8.5 7.3 6.8 \nHighest grade completed (avg.) 9.9 10.3 9.8 9.9 10.0 \n8\nth or less 18.2 16.6 21.8 22.0 18.6 \nSome high school 72.2 62.7 66.2 63.4 65.5 \nHigh school graduate 5.9 14.5 7.7 8.1 9.6 \nHigh school equivalency 3.2 5.7 3.5 4.9 5.1 Some postsecondary 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.8 0.6 College graduate (4-year) 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.8 0.6 \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 46.5 35.8 60.6 56.1 46.9 \nHigh school or below 46.0 35.2 59.2 54.5 45.8 Alternative school 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Postsecondary 0.5 0.5 1.4 1.6 1.1 \nNot attending school 53.5 64.2 39.4 43.9 53.1 \nHigh school dropout 44.4 44.0 28.9 30.9 38.4 \nHigh school graduate/equiv. 9.1 20.2 10.6 13.0 14.7 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 212Table IV-13 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 120,226 110,770 119,969 310 269 261\nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 3.6 4.7 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 0.0 7.5 27.8 0.0 0.0 4.2 Partner program 42.6 40.8 40.1 3.9 11.2 13.0 \nWagner-Peyser 38.7 35.3 35.1 3.9 11.2 9.2 \nTAA 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vocational Education 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 5.8 7.3 6.9 0.0 0.0 3.8 \nWeeks participated (average) 57.0 56.4 58.6 35.4 41.4 43.0 \n26 or fewer weeks 36.6 36.8 36.4 44.2 35.3 29.1 26 to 52 weeks 26.0 25.1 25.5 31.0 29.0 38.7 52 to 78 weeks 13.2 14.2 13.2 19.4 27.5 24.1 \nMore than 78 weeks 24.2 24.0 24.9 5.5 8.2 8.0 \nYouth Activities (among with \nactivities) \nEducational achievement \nservices 51.8 53.4 52.0 79.6 82.0 72.2 \nEmployment services 56.8 57.9 63.4 55.7 63.9 74.5 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 29.3 27.9 31.4 61.8 61.3 54.8 \nLeadership development \nactivities 31.5 30.1 30.1 58.3 60.5 47.5 \nAdditional support for youth \nservices 45.5 46.6 45.7 86.4 82.3 68.3 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 34.8 30.6 24.2 62.3 51.7 58.2 \nNeeds-related payments 3.7 4.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 37.9 35.4 36.0 38.7 49.4 59.8 \nEnrolled in Education 79.0 81.5 80.2 75.8 66.9 53.6 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.0 2.2 2.1 0.6 3.0 2.3 \nNote: For most recent exit cohort 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to \nJune 2009 . Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 213Table IV-14 \nNumber of Youth Exiters, by Serv ices Received, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Nation \nPY 2007 Nation \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 State \nPY 2007 State \nPY 2008 Nation \n4/1/09–\n3/31/10 \nNumber of exiters 120,226 110,770 119,969 310 269 261\nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 4,303 5,214 5,488 0 0 0\nWIA dislocated worker 270 264 302 0 0 0ARRA-funded 0 8,263 33,405 0 0 11\nPartner program 51,232 45,180 48,136 12 30 34\nWagner-Peyser 46,580 39,105 42,166 12 30 24TAA 543 6 7 0 0 0National Farmworker Jobs 13 11 9 0 0 0Veterans programs 208 170 163 0 0 0Vocational Education 245 243 377 0 0 0\nAdult Education 684 542 609 0 0 0\nOther partner programs 7,020 8,120 8,316 0 0 10\nWeeks participated \n26 or fewer weeks 44,047 40,733 43,726 137 95 76\n26 to 52 weeks 31,265 27,813 30,546 96 78 101\n52 to 78 weeks 15,857 15,691 15,817 60 74 63\nMore than 78 weeks 29,057 26,533 29,880 17 22 21\nYouth Activities (among with \nactivities) \n \nEducational achievement services 57,710 52,110 54,116 246 218 187\nEmployment services 63,342 56,453 66,067 172 170 193\nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 32,687 27,203 32,744 191 163 142\nLeadership development activities 35,159 29,381 31,352 180 161 123\nAdditional support for youth \nservices 50,718 45,425 47,609 267 219 177\nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 41,849 33,863 9,501 193 139 39\nNeeds-related payments 4,504 4,427 5,338 0 0 0\nOther supportive services 45,565 39,211 43,202 120 133 156\nEnrolled in Education 94,979 90,266 96,156 235 180 140\nPell Grant Recipient 2,355 2,479 2,515 2 8 6\nNote: For most recent exit cohort 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to \nJune 2009 . Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 214Table IV-15 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters fr om April 2009 to March 2010, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n All Exiters 14 to 15 16 to 17 18 19 to 21 \nNumber of exiters 261 35 110 57 59 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 4.2 8.6 4.5 1.8 3.4 \nPartner program 13.0 8.6 13.6 14.0 13.6 \nWagner-Peyser 9.2 0.0 9.1 12.3 11.9 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 3.8 8.6 4.5 1.8 1.7 \nWeeks participated (average) 43.0 55.8 43.2 45.1 32.8 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.1 0.0 34.5 24.6 40.7 \n26 to 52 weeks 38.7 25.7 34.5 47.4 45.8 \n52 to 78 weeks 24.1 71.4 20.0 19.3 8.5 More than 78 weeks 8.0 2.9 10.9 8.8 5.1 \nYouth Activities (among with \nactivities) \nEducational achievement services 72.2 91.4 69.1 75.4 63.2 \nEmployment services 74.5 71.4 70.0 78.9 80.7 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 54.8 94.3 54.5 49.1 36.8 \nLeadership development activities 47.5 82.9 43.6 36.8 43.9 \nAdditional support for youth \nservices 68.3 82.9 63.6 63.2 73.7 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.2 75.0 63.3 56.3 38.5 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.8 45.7 50.9 70.2 74.6 \nEnrolled in Education 53.6 100.0 60.9 33.3 32.2 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.3 0.0 0.9 7.0 1.7 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 215Table IV-16 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters from Apr il 2009 to March 2010, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters 255 10 241 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 4.3 0.0 4.6 \nPartner program 12.5 0.0 13.3 \nWagner-Peyser 8.6 0.0 9.1 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 3.9 0.0 4.1 \nWeeks participated (average) 42.9 34.8 43.2 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.8 40.0 29.5 \n26 to 52 weeks 37.6 40.0 37.8 \n52 to 78 weeks 24.3 20.0 24.1 More than 78 weeks 8.2 0.0 8.7 \nYouth Activities (among with activities) \nEducational achievement services 71.5 88.9 70.4 \nEmployment services 74.3 55.6 75.0 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 54.9 33.3 55.4 \nLeadership development activities 47.4 66.7 46.3 \nAdditional support for youth services 68.8 88.9 67.9 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.5 33.3 59.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.2 20.0 60.6 \nEnrolled in Education 53.3 50.0 53.5 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.0 0.0 2.1 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 216Table IV-17 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters from Apr il 2009 to March 2010, by Gender and Disability \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Gender With a \nDisability Ever in \nFoster Care All Exiters Male Female \nNumber of exiters 261 142 119 180 58 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 4.2 4.2 4.2 3.3 3.4 \nPartner program 13.0 9.2 17.6 10.0 13.8 \nWagner-Peyser 9.2 5.6 13.4 6.7 10.3 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 3.8 3.5 4.2 3.3 3.4 \nWeeks participated (average) 43.0 38.7 48.0 42.9 41.3 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.1 32.4 25.2 30.0 29.3 \n26 to 52 weeks 38.7 41.5 35.3 38.9 32.8 \n52 to 78 weeks 24.1 21.8 26.9 21.7 32.8 More than 78 weeks 8.0 4.2 12.6 9.4 5.2 \nYouth Activities (among with \nactivities) \nEducational achievement services 72.2 76.4 67.2 73.2 68.4 \nEmployment services 74.5 72.1 77.3 74.3 61.4 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 54.8 60.0 48.7 58.1 59.6 \nLeadership development activities 47.5 58.6 34.5 45.8 43.9 \nAdditional support for youth services 68.3 72.1 63.9 67.6 63.2 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.2 60.5 55.2 62.5 62.5 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.8 54.9 65.5 57.8 58.6 \nEnrolled in Education 53.6 64.1 41.2 55.6 62.1 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.3 2.1 2.5 1.7 1.7 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 217Table IV-18 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Employment at Participation and Basic Skills Deficiency \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Employed at participation Basic Skills Deficient \n Yes No Yes No \nNumber of exiters 261 254 109 152 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 4.2 4.3 0.0 7.2 Partner program 13.0 13.4 11.0 14.5 \nWagner-Peyser 9.2 9.4 11.0 7.9 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 3.8 3.9 0.0 6.6 \nWeeks participated (average) 43.0 42.7 52.5 36.1 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.1 29.1 11.9 41.4 \n26 to 52 weeks 38.7 38.6 39.4 38.2 52 to 78 weeks 24.1 24.4 36.7 15.1 More than 78 weeks 8.0 7.9 11.9 5.3 \nYouth Activities (among with \nactivities) \nEducational achievement services 72.2 72.2 88.1 60.7 \nEmployment services 74.5 73.8 75.2 74.0 Summer youth employment \nopportunities 54.8 55.2 57.8 52.7 \nLeadership development activities 47.5 47.2 50.5 45.3 \nAdditional support for youth services 68.3 67.5 70.6 66.7 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.2 56.3 82.4 33.3 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.8 59.4 55.0 63.2 \nEnrolled in Education 53.6 53.5 63.3 46.7 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.3 2.4 0.9 3.3 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 218Table IV-19 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by School Status at Participation \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Attending School Not Attending School \n All \nExiters High School \nor Below Post-\nsecondary High School \nDropout High School \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters 261 112 101 45 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 4.2 6.3 1.0 6.7 Partner program 13.0 9.8 12.9 22.2 \nWagner-Peyser 9.2 3.6 12.9 15.6 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 3.8 6.3 0.0 6.7 \nWeeks participated (average) 43.0 43.6 47.3 33.2 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.1 25.9 27.7 37.8 \n26 to 52 weeks 38.7 36.6 36.6 48.9 52 to 78 weeks 24.1 32.1 22.8 8.9 More than 78 weeks 8.0 5.4 12.9 4.4 \nYouth Activities (among with activities) \nEducational achievement services 72.2 77.5 82.2 38.6 \nEmployment services 74.5 61.3 84.2 88.6 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 54.8 75.7 40.6 34.1 \nLeadership development activities 47.5 60.4 37.6 36.4 \nAdditional support for youth services 68.3 73.0 67.3 59.1 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.2 69.0 50.0 50.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.8 44.6 69.3 75.6 \nEnrolled in Education 53.6 100.0 20.8 8.9 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.3 0.9 3.0 2.2 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 219Table IV-20 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, \nOut-of-School and In-School Youth at Participation \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Out of School In School \n \n \nAll High \nSchool \nDropout High \nSchool \nGraduate Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Basic \nSkills Deficient Attending \nHigh School \nor Alternative \nSchool Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Not Basic \nSkills Deficient \nNumber of exiters 147 101 45 112 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 2.7 1.0 6.7 6.3 \nPartner program 15.6 12.9 22.2 9.8 \nWagner-Peyser 13.6 12.9 15.6 3.6 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 2.0 0.0 6.7 6.3 \nWeeks participated (average) 42.8 47.3 33.2 43.6 \n26 or fewer weeks 30.6 27.7 37.8 25.9 26 to 52 weeks 40.8 36.6 48.9 36.6 \n52 to 78 weeks 18.4 22.8 8.9 32.1 \nMore than 78 weeks 10.2 12.9 4.4 5.4 \nYouth Activities (among with \nactivities) \nEducational achievement 69.2 82.2 38.6 77.5 \nEmployment services 85.6 84.2 88.6 61.3 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 38.4 40.6 34.1 75.7 \nLeadership development \nactivities 37.7 37.6 36.4 60.4 \nAdditional support for youth 65.1 67.3 59.1 73.0 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up 50.0 50.0 50.0 69.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 71.4 69.3 75.6 44.6 \nEnrolled in Education 17.7 20.8 8.9 100.0 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.7 3.0 2.2 0.9 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 220Table IV-21 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters from Apr il 2009 to March 2010, by Barriers to Employment \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll \nExiters Homeless or \nRunaway \nOffender Pregnant or \nParenting Needs \nAdditional \nAssistance \nNumber of exiters 261 59 117 37 259 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 4.2 5.1 4.3 2.7 4.2 \nPartner program 13.0 16.9 12.0 16.2 13.1 \nWagner-Peyser 9.2 13.6 7.7 13.5 9.3 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 3.8 3.4 4.3 2.7 3.9 \nWeeks participated (average) 43.0 38.0 39.2 46.2 43.2 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.1 35.6 34.2 37.8 28.6 26 to 52 weeks 38.7 40.7 40.2 29.7 39.0 \n52 to 78 weeks 24.1 20.3 21.4 18.9 24.3 \nMore than 78 weeks 8.0 3.4 4.3 13.5 8.1 \nYouth Activities (among with activities) \nEducational achievement services 72.2 67.8 74.8 66.7 72.0 \nEmployment services 74.5 78.0 73.0 69.4 74.7 Summer youth employment \nopportunities 54.8 37.3 48.7 50.0 55.3 \nLeadership development activities 47.5 35.6 50.4 38.9 47.5 \nAdditional support for youth services 68.3 76.3 69.6 72.2 68.1 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.2 33.3 45.8 36.4 58.2 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.8 71.2 61.5 67.6 59.8 \nEnrolled in Education 53.6 37.3 50.4 43.2 53.7 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.3 0.0 0.9 8.1 2.3 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 221Table IV-22 \nServices Received by Youth Exit ers from April 2009 to March 2010, \nby Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Public Assistance \n All Exiters Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters 261 255 43 40 18 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nARRA-funded 4.2 4.3 4.7 5.0 0.0 Partner program 13.0 12.9 11.6 10.0 11.1 \nWagner-Peyser 9.2 9.0 7.0 5.0 11.1 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVeterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nVocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other partner programs 3.8 3.9 4.7 5.0 0.0 \nWeeks participated (average) 43.0 42.7 47.7 47.7 49.7 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.1 29.4 23.3 25.0 11.1 \n26 to 52 weeks 38.7 38.4 34.9 32.5 38.9 52 to 78 weeks 24.1 24.3 32.6 32.5 44.4 More than 78 weeks 8.0 7.8 9.3 10.0 5.6 \nYouth Activities (among with activities) \nEducational achievement services 72.2 71.5 81.4 82.5 88.9 \nEmployment services 74.5 75.1 62.8 65.0 66.7 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 54.8 54.5 69.8 70.0 66.7 \nLeadership development activities 47.5 47.0 48.8 52.5 50.0 \nAdditional support for youth services 68.3 67.6 74.4 80.0 66.7 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.2 57.6 70.0 57.1 75.0 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.8 59.6 51.2 47.5 55.6 \nEnrolled in Education 53.6 53.3 69.8 70.0 72.2 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.5 0.0 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 222Table IV-23 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n All \nExiters Limited English-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Basic \nSkills \nDeficient \nNumber of exiters 261 23 109 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nWIA dislocated worker 0.0 0.0 0.0 ARRA-funded 4.2 4.3 0.0 \nPartner program 13.0 13.0 11.0 \nWagner-Peyser 9.2 8.7 11.0 TAA 0.0 0.0 0.0 National Farmworker Jobs 0.0 0.0 0.0 Veterans programs 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vocational Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdult Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther partner programs 3.8 4.3 0.0 \nWeeks participated (average) 43.0 50.6 52.5 \n26 or fewer weeks 29.1 34.8 11.9 \n26 to 52 weeks 38.7 21.7 39.4 \n52 to 78 weeks 24.1 30.4 36.7 \nMore than 78 weeks 8.0 13.0 11.9 \nYouth Activities (among with \nactivities) \nEducational achievement services 72.2 68.2 88.1 \nEmployment services 74.5 77.3 75.2 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 54.8 59.1 57.8 \nLeadership development activities 47.5 36.4 50.5 \nAdditional support for youth services 68.3 72.7 70.6 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up \nservices 58.2 20.0 82.4 \nNeeds-related payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOther supportive services 59.8 69.6 55.0 \nEnrolled in Education 53.6 47.8 63.3 \nPell Grant Recipient 2.3 8.7 0.9 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters from April 2009 to June 2009 . Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 223Table IV-24 \nServices Received by Youth Exiters fr om April 2009 to March 2010, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nNumber of \nExiters Educational \nAchievement \nServices \nEmployment \nServices Summer \nEmployment \nOpportunities Leadership \nDevelopment \nOpportunities Additional \nSupport \nfor Youth \nNation 119,969 52.0 63.4 31.4 30.1 45.7 \nAlabama 779 34.8 62.5 9.3 23.8 25.4 Alaska 561 72.9 59.2 35.7 4.3 98.2 Arizona 1,379 70.1 65.5 21.0 43.8 99.9 Arkansas 982 58.6 94.6 64.5 46.0 54.0 \nCalifornia 13,240 71.1 79.5 19.1 23.1 34.3 \nColorado 1,354 91.1 77.7 32.0 8.1 26.3 Connecticut 645 58.6 89.0 8.1 15.2 38.3 Delaware 132 100.0 95.5 20.5 0.0 0.0 District of \nColumbia 174 91.4 30.5 3.3 0.0 0.0 \nFlorida 4,970 68.5 68.5 5.6 7.1 10.2 \nGeorgia 2,186 49.3 73.7 47.9 5.3 12.3 Hawaii 263 41.1 33.5 12.2 12.9 95.4 Idaho 476 81.3 57.1 23.1 95.2 54.6 Illinois 5,733 14.8 91.3 32.4 14.6 41.0 \nIndiana 3,853 55.5 53.6 5.6 32.1 51.7 \nIowa 545 58.4 72.4 9.5 22.9 86.2 Kansas 666 51.9 69.7 33.0 49.7 8.1 Kentucky 1,611 51.1 54.3 17.2 57.2 9.7 Louisiana 1,394 47.8 82.2 48.3 21.8 36.6 Maine 358 70.7 80.7 1.4 22.6 100.0 \nMaryland 680 27.3 90.1 32.6 42.7 52.7 \nMassachusetts 1,922 85.6 65.2 44.9 51.0 80.5 Michigan 6,307 43.3 55.7 100.0 36.5 33.2 Minnesota 1,673 66.2 50.1 30.5 65.1 78.2 Mississippi 3,865 47.3 68.7 6.5 27.1 69.6 \nMissouri 1,707 46.4 52.0 28.6 38.9 94.4 \nMontana 267 39.6 84.0 20.8 22.4 62.0 Nebraska 344 35.5 70.3 9.9 16.3 100.0 Nevada 275 71.8 55.3 3.4 43.5 26.3 New Hampshire 340 98.2 97.0 47.6 93.1 94.6 \nNew Jersey 1,835 55.5 27.5 6.0 53.7 0.0 \nNew Mexico 1,042 62.4 83.1 73.5 0.9 50.0 New York 7,218 57.8 59.3 41.2 5.5 83.9 North Carolina 1,575 52.1 49.5 23.2 38.3 98.5 North Dakota 348 57.9 75.9 18.6 13.2 21.9 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 224 \nNumber of \nExiters Educational \nAchievement \nServices \nEmployment \nServices Summer \nEmployment \nOpportunities Leadership \nDevelopment \nOpportunities Additional \nSupport \nfor Youth \nOhio 4,732 56.2 49.3 23.4 63.3 47.6 \nOklahoma 653 56.8 83.1 45.7 78.3 9.8 Oregon 1,450 67.6 72.9 43.5 42.8 99.2 Pennsylvania 3,946 66.2 55.0 16.9 46.9 65.2 \nPuerto Rico 16,333 22.3 59.1 35.3 9.3 13.7 \nRhode Island 601 54.3 49.3 51.1 22.8 6.9 South Carolina 3,312 68.8 43.2 8.1 51.7 58.7 South Dakota 247 69.2 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 Tennessee 5,234 19.8 16.3 33.7 54.3 35.6 \nTexas 6,266 33.8 59.1 36.0 42.1 26.5 \nUtah 691 71.7 63.8 27.7 64.8 88.9 Vermont 261 72.2 74.5 54.8 47.5 68.3 Virgin Islands 171 25.0 21.3 52.2 0.0 21.3 Virginia 1,564 31.3 59.5 33.0 37.1 53.7 Washington 2,055 72.1 79.7 11.7 9.7 67.0 \nWest Virginia 415 45.3 52.8 34.4 47.5 86.1 \nWisconsin 1,081 80.1 66.7 85.5 11.2 30.7 Wyoming 258 50.0 67.9 0.0 31.6 18.8 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 225This page intentionally blank. Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 226Table IV-25 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Nation \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 Nation \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 Nation \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 State \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 \nNumber of exiters 120,337 114,783 119,969 281 252 261 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment \nor Education 58.9 53.3 50.8 41.9 39.0 35.8 \nEmployment 46.3 41.1 37.0 37.7 34.6 32.5 \nEducation 12.7 12.2 13.9 4.2 4.4 3.3 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate 51.7 51.6 51.8 17.2 18.8 18.6 \nSecondary sch. diploma 32.3 31.7 35.6 14.2 14.1 16.3 \nGED or equivalency 9.1 9.4 7.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCert. or postsec. degree 10.2 10.5 8.9 3.0 4.7 2.3 \n PY 2007 PY 2008 PY 2009 PY 2007 PY 2008 PY 2009 \nLiteracy and Numeracy \nGains (not based on exiters) 32.2 36.7 39.4 \nOutcomes for All Youth Nation \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 Nation \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 Nation \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 State \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 \nAttending secondary school \nat exit 27.1 27.5 26.7 61.6 50.8 45.6 \nPlacement (quarter after \nexit) 31.2 27.2 25.9 31.1 24.7 20.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter \nafter exit) 28.9 32.9 23.7 34.4 \nNot attending secondary \nschool at exit 72.9 72.5 73.3 38.4 49.2 54.4 \nPlacement (quarter after \nexit) 73.4 68.4 67.2 59.5 54.3 53.1 \nPostsecondary education 13.5 13.6 16.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 1.7 1.2 1.2 6.0 7.4 6.3 \nApprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 57.9 53.2 49.5 53.6 46.8 46.9 \nRetention (3rd quarter \nafter exit) 65.4 64.8 53.6 53.3 \nPostsecondary education 11.2 5.8 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 1.3 0.9 0.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Employment 52.6 57.9 53.6 53.3 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 227 Nation \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 Nation \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 Nation \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 State \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nNontraditional \nemployment (quarter after exit) 4.8 5.2 5.3 10.5 17.6 18.2 \nMales 5.5 6.0 6.2 7.7 12.5 20.0 \nFemales 4.4 4.8 4.8 16.7 22.2 16.7 \nEarnings of employed in \nquarter after exit (average)\n $2,633 $2,593 $2,513 $1,677 $1,732 $1,661 \n$1 - $2,499 58.0 58.1 60.0 77.1 76.1 76.7 \n$2,500 - $4,999 30.0 30.4 29.3 18.1 17.9 16.3 \n$5,000 - $7,499 8.2 7.9 7.3 4.8 6.0 7.0 $7,500 or more 3.8 3.5 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average) $2,808 $3,053 $1,992 $2,311 \n$1 - $2,499 54.4 48.9 70.1 55.6 \n$2,500 - $4,999 31.6 34.3 24.7 40.7 \n$5,000 - $7,499 9.6 11.5 3.9 3.7 $7,500 or more 4.4 5.4 1.3 0.0 \nOlder Youth Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (qtr. after \nexit, excludes employed at entry) 66.4 60.3 56.0 63.3 65.4 64.7 \nRetained employment 3rd \nquarter after exit 80.7 81.8 68.4 66.7 \nRetained employment 4th \nquarter after exit 73.4 74.0 62.5 66.7 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd qtrs. after exit $3,440 $3,532 $1,078 $41 \n3rd and 4th qtrs. after exit $3,254 $3,471 $1,037 $2,090 \nCredential rate 39.6 36.4 34.3 45.5 31.0 27.8 \nYounger Youth \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention 63.6 60.3 50.9 54.5 \nDiploma attainment rate 68.0 64.2 63.7 47.8 49.1 51.5 \nSkill attainment rate 82.8 81.3 80.4 79.9 79.9 79.9 \nNote: Outcome data for exiters from October 2008 o September 2009 are incomplete. Retention \noutcomes are based on 6 months of exiters. \nOutcome data for exiters from April 2008 to March 200 9 do not include retention outcomes. Placement \noutcomes are based on 6 months of exiters. Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 228Table IV-26 \nNumber of Youth Exiters Attaining Outcomes Trends Over Time \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Nation \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 Nation \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 Nation \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 State \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 \nNumber of exiters 120,337 114,783 119,969 281 252 261 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation 59,307 51,463 35,045 90 71 44 \nEmployment 46,575 39,704 25,493 81 63 40 \nEducation 12,732 11,759 9,552 9 8 4 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate 48,417 46,548 33,445 29 24 16 \nSecondary school diploma 30,263 28,608 22,973 24 18 14 \nGED or equivalency 8,566 8,484 4,724 0 0 0 \nCertificate or postsecondary \ndegree 9,588 9,456 5,748 5 6 2 \n PY 2007 PY 2008 PY 2009 PY 2007 PY 2008 PY 2009 \nLiteracy and Numeracy \nGains (not based on exiters) 9,202 13,192 15,948 \nOutcomes for All Youth Nation \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 Nation \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 Nation \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 State \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 \nAttending secondary school \nat exit 26,890 25,532 25,563 135 97 97 \nPlacement (qtr. after exit) 8,394 6,954 5,306 42 24 24 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit) 7,763 1,648 32 11 11 \nNot attending secondary \nschool at exit 72,460 67,320 70,034 84 94 94 \nPlacement (qtr. after exit) 53,179 46,026 31,087 50 51 51 \nPostsecondary education 9,813 9,189 7,531 0 0 0 \nAdvanced training 1,209 834 568 5 7 7 Apprenticeships 24 12 7 0 0 0 Military service 207 172 117 0 0 0 Employment 41,926 35,819 22,864 45 44 44 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit) 47,380 13,666 45 16 \nPostsecondary education 8,127 1,229 0 0 \nAdvanced training 945 185 0 0 Apprenticeships 13 4 0 0 Military service 181 42 0 0 0 \nEmployment 38,114 12,206 45 16 16 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 229 Nation \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 Nation \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 Nation \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 State \nApr. 2007–\nMar. 2008 State \nOct. 2007–\nSep. 2008 State \nApr. 2008–\nMar. 2010 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit) 939 935 557 2 3 2 \nMales 416 414 261 1 1 1 \nFemales 523 521 296 1 2 1 \nEarnings of employed in \nquarter after exit (average) \n$1 - $2,499 29,291 24,998 16,388 64 51 33 \n$2,500 - $4,999 15,161 13,101 8,014 15 12 7 \n$5,000 - $7,499 4,131 3,408 1,986 4 4 3 \n$7,500 or more 1,904 1,519 941 0 0 0 \nEarnings of employed in 3rd \nquarter after exit (average) \n$1 - $2,499 24,973 7,413 54 15 \n$2,500 - $4,999 14,517 5,202 19 11 \n$5,000 - $7,499 4,424 1,740 3 1 \n$7,500 or more 2,026 812 1 0 \nOlder Youth WIA \nPerformance and 12-Month \nOutcomes \nEntered employment (quarter \nafter exit, excludes employed at entry) 15,626 14,351 8,314 19 17 11 \nRetained employment 3\nrd \nquarter after exit 15,957 6,359 13 4 \nRetained employment 4th \nquarter after exit 11,727 2,944 10 2 \nCredential rate 12,234 11,253 6,579 15 9 5 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention 34,127 8,614 29 12 \nDiploma attainment rate 31,952 28,296 29,108 22 26 35 \n \nNote: Outcome data for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009 are incomplete. Retention \noutcomes are based on 6 months of exiters. \nOutcome data for exiters from April 2009 to March 201 0 do not include retention outcomes. Placement \noutcomes are based on 6 months of exiters. Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 230Table IV-27 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Age \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Age at Participation \n All 14 to 15 16 to 17 18 19 to 21 \nNumber of exiters1 261 35 110 57 59 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 39.0 16.3 39.7 42.1 67.9 \nEmployment 34.6 16.3 34.2 36.8 60.7 \nEducation 4.4 0.0 5.5 5.3 7.1 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 18.8 0.0 17.0 47.4 54.5 \nSecondary school diploma 14.1 0.0 17.0 31.6 27.3 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Certificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.7 0.0 0.0 15.8 27.3 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters)\n 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.6 100.0 54.8 12.2 17.5 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.7 18.6 28.6 14.3 60.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.7 21.1 23.4 25.0 50.0 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 54.4 0.0 45.2 87.8 82.5 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 54.3 0.0 54.5 48.6 66.7 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advanced training 7.4 0.0 9.1 5.7 8.3 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 46.8 0.0 45.5 42.9 58.3 \nRetention (3rd quarter after exit)\n2 53.6 33.3 41.4 64.0 59.3 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 53.6 33.3 41.4 64.0 59.3 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 231 Age at Participation \n All 14 to 15 16 to 17 18 19 to 21 \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 17.6 17.6 \nMales 12.5 12.5 \nFemales 22.2 22.2 \nEarnings of employed in quarter \nafter exit (average) 3 $1,732 $813 $1,485 $1,952 $2,336 \n$1 - $2,499 76.1 100.0 84.6 75.0 52.9 \n$2,500 - $4,999 17.9 0.0 11.5 12.5 41.2 \n$5,000 - $7,499 6.0 0.0 3.8 12.5 5.9 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,992 $1,111 $2,147 $3,229 $1,201 \n$1 - $2,499 70.1 92.3 70.4 33.3 89.5 \n$2,500 - $4,999 24.7 7.7 22.2 55.6 10.5 \n$5,000 - $7,499 3.9 0.0 7.4 5.6 0.0 $7,500 or more 1.3 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 65.4 65.4 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 68.4 68.4 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 62.5 62.5 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,078 $1,078 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,037 $1,037 \nCredential rate3 31.0 31.0 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 50.9 33.3 41.4 64.0 \nDiploma attainment rate1 51.5 47.4 56.7 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.9 86.8 75.5 82.1 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 232Table IV-28 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Ethnicity and Race \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nNumber of exiters1 255 10 241 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 38.4 50.0 37.7 \nEmployment 33.9 50.0 32.7 \nEducation 4.5 0.0 4.9 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 17.6 16.7 18.3 \nSecondary school diploma 13.6 0.0 14.8 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 Certificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.0 16.7 3.5 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters)\n 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.8 37.5 45.8 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.0 40.0 23.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.5 16.7 24.6 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 54.2 62.5 54.2 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 54.4 60.0 53.6 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advanced training 7.8 0.0 8.3 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 46.7 60.0 45.2 \nRetention (3rd quarter after exit)\n2 53.2 50.0 52.7 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 53.2 50.0 52.7 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 233 Hispanic Not Hispanic \n All Black (only) White (only) Other \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 20.0 0.0 23.1 \nMales 14.3 0.0 20.0 \nFemales 25.0 25.0 \nEarnings of employed in quarter \nafter exit (average) 3 $1,732 $1,329 $1,756 \n$1 - $2,499 75.0 80.0 75.4 \n$2,500 - $4,999 18.8 20.0 17.5 \n$5,000 - $7,499 6.3 0.0 7.0 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,962 $2,288 $1,938 \n$1 - $2,499 69.4 50.0 71.0 \n$2,500 - $4,999 26.4 50.0 24.6 \n$5,000 - $7,499 4.2 0.0 4.3 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 62.5 66.7 61.9 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 64.7 64.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 60.0 60.0 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,380 $1,380 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $991 $991 \nCredential rate3 29.6 33.3 29.2 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 51.9 100.0 50.0 \nDiploma attainment rate1 50.8 33.3 50.8 \nSkill attainment rate1 80.1 84.6 79.5 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n \n \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 234Table IV-29 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Gender and Disability \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Gender \nWith a \nDisability Ever in \nFoster Care \nAll Exiters \nMale \nFemale \nNumber of exiters1 261 142 119 180 58 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 39.0 32.1 48.7 33.3 40.9 \nEmployment 34.6 29.2 42.1 29.3 36.4 \nEducation 4.4 2.8 6.6 4.1 4.5 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 18.8 11.9 31.8 15.9 20.6 \nSecondary school diploma 14.1 6.0 29.5 13.6 17.6 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Certificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.7 6.0 2.3 2.3 2.9 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters)\n 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.6 56.3 32.7 49.0 53.1 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.7 21.7 32.1 24.3 33.3 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.7 22.9 25.6 17.6 22.2 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 54.4 43.7 67.3 51.0 46.9 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 54.3 51.2 56.9 44.6 47.6 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advanced training 7.4 7.0 7.8 7.1 9.5 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 46.8 44.2 49.0 37.5 38.1 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)\n2 53.6 59.1 47.5 50.0 70.6 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nApprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 53.6 59.1 47.5 50.0 70.6 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 235 Gender \nWith a \nDisability Ever in \nFoster Care \nAll Exiters \nMale \nFemale \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 17.6 12.5 22.2 37.5 25.0 \nMales 12.5 12.5 25.0 0.0 \nFemales 22.2 22.2 50.0 33.3 \nEarnings of employed in quarter \nafter exit (average) 3 $1,732 $1,709 $1,756 $1,582 $2,223 \n$1 - $2,499 76.1 79.4 72.7 83.8 62.5 \n$2,500 - $4,999 17.9 14.7 21.2 13.5 25.0 $5,000 - $7,499 6.0 5.9 6.1 2.7 12.5 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,992 $1,900 $2,143 $1,804 $2,320 \n$1 - $2,499 70.1 75.0 62.1 72.9 55.6 \n$2,500 - $4,999 24.7 18.8 34.5 22.9 44.4 $5,000 - $7,499 3.9 6.3 0.0 2.1 0.0 $7,500 or more 1.3 0.0 3.4 2.1 0.0 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \n \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 65.4 72.7 60.0 53.3 57.1 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 68.4 76.9 50.0 78.6 75.0 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 62.5 75.0 25.0 75.0 100.0 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,078 $1,186 $844 $1,535 $741 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,037 $1,299 $250 $1,258 $2,018 \nCredential rate3 31.0 25.0 35.3 35.3 25.0 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 50.9 51.6 50.0 41.7 69.2 \nDiploma attainment rate1 51.5 44.4 56.1 45.7 63.6 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.9 83.3 76.2 77.6 79.4 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 236Table IV-30 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Employment at Participation and Basic Skills Deficiency \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Employed at Participation Basic Skills Deficient \n Yes No Yes No \nNumber of exiters1 261 254 109 152 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 39.0 39.0 34.7 44.0 \nEmployment 34.6 34.6 30.6 39.3 \nEducation 4.4 4.4 4.1 4.8 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 18.8 17.1 22.2 12.8 \nSecondary school diploma 14.1 13.0 16.0 10.6 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Certificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.7 4.1 6.2 2.1 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters)\n 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.6 45.8 48.5 43.2 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.7 24.5 24.6 25.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.7 23.1 19.6 32.6 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 54.4 54.2 51.5 56.8 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 54.3 52.7 48.8 58.8 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advanced training 7.4 7.7 7.0 7.8 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 46.8 45.1 41.9 51.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after exit)\n2 53.6 52.4 50.0 57.1 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 53.6 52.4 50.0 57.1 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 237 \nAll Exiters Employed at Participation Basic Skills Deficient \n Yes No Yes No \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 17.6 17.6 16.7 18.2 \nMales 12.5 12.5 0.0 20.0 \nFemales 22.2 22.2 33.3 16.7 \nEarnings of employed in \nquarter after exit (average) 3 $1,732 $1,755 $1,869 $1,607 \n$1 - $2,499 76.1 74.6 75.0 77.1 \n$2,500 - $4,999 17.9 19.0 18.8 17.1 \n$5,000 - $7,499 6.0 6.3 6.3 5.7 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,992 $1,919 $1,403 $2,596 \n$1 - $2,499 70.1 71.6 82.1 57.9 \n$2,500 - $4,999 24.7 24.3 15.4 34.2 \n$5,000 - $7,499 3.9 2.7 2.6 5.3 $7,500 or more 1.3 1.4 0.0 2.6 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 65.4 65.4 54.5 73.3 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 68.4 68.4 70.0 66.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 62.5 62.5 60.0 66.7 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,078 $1,078 $2,017 $35 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,037 $1,037 $1,398 $435 \nCredential rate3 31.0 32.1 46.2 18.8 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 50.9 49.1 42.3 58.1 \nDiploma attainment rate1 51.5 51.5 40.0 67.9 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.9 80.3 79.2 80.8 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n \n \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 238Table IV-31 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by School Status at Participation \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Attending School Not Attending School \n \nAll Exiters High School \nor Below Post-\nsecondary High School \nDropout High School \nGraduate \nNumber of exiters1 261 112 101 45 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 39.0 26.9 45.7 75.0 \nEmployment 34.6 25.9 39.1 60.7 \nEducation 4.4 0.9 6.5 14.3 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 18.8 18.8 30.0 0.0 \nSecondary school diploma 14.1 16.1 0.0 0.0 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Certificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.7 2.7 30.0 0.0 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters)\n 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.6 77.8 20.3 0.0 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.7 23.0 40.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.7 22.8 33.3 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 54.4 22.2 79.7 100.0 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 54.3 48.0 47.4 75.0 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advanced training 7.4 4.0 5.3 14.3 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 46.8 44.0 42.1 60.7 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)\n2 53.6 41.9 64.5 52.4 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nApprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 53.6 41.9 64.5 52.4 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 239 Attending School Not Attending School \n \nAll Exiters High School \nor Below Post-\nsecondary High School \nDropout High School \nGraduate \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 17.6 25.0 0.0 20.0 \nMales 12.5 0.0 0.0 20.0 \nFemales 22.2 33.3 0.0 20.0 \nEarnings of employed in quarter \nafter exit (average) 3 $1,732 $1,420 $1,666 $2,374 \n$1 - $2,499 76.1 83.9 78.9 58.8 \n$2,500 - $4,999 17.9 9.7 21.1 29.4 $5,000 - $7,499 6.0 6.5 0.0 11.8 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,992 $1,898 $2,226 $2,005 \n$1 - $2,499 70.1 70.7 62.5 81.8 \n$2,500 - $4,999 24.7 24.4 29.2 18.2 $5,000 - $7,499 3.9 2.4 8.3 0.0 $7,500 or more 1.3 2.4 0.0 0.0 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \n \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 65.4 57.1 42.9 83.3 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 68.4 85.7 50.0 66.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 62.5 83.3 50.0 50.0 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,078 $2,151 $-1,201 $2,105 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,037 $1,404 $-47 $1,392 \nCredential rate3 31.0 57.1 12.5 28.6 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 50.9 36.0 66.7 50.0 \nDiploma attainment rate1 51.5 63.2 46.9 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.9 83.0 72.5 89.5 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 240Table IV-32 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters for Out-Of-School and In-School Youth \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Out of School In School \n \n \nAll High \nSchool \nDropout High \nSchool \nGraduate Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Basic \nSkills Deficient Attending \nHigh School \nor Alternative \nSchool Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Not Basic \nSkills \nDeficient \nNumber of exiters1 147 101 45 112 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 56.8 45.7 75.0 26.9 \nEmployment 47.3 39.1 60.7 25.9 \nEducation 9.5 6.5 14.3 0.9 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 20.0 30.0 0.0 18.8 \nSecondary school diploma 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Certificate or postsecondary \ndegree 20.0 30.0 0.0 2.7 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters)\n 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 14.0 20.3 0.0 77.8 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 40.0 40.0 23.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 33.3 33.3 22.8 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 86.0 79.7 100.0 22.2 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 57.4 47.4 75.0 48.0 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advanced training 8.8 5.3 14.3 4.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 48.5 42.1 60.7 44.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)\n2 60.4 64.5 52.4 41.9 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nApprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 60.4 64.5 52.4 41.9 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 241 Out of School In School \n \n \nAll High \nSchool \nDropout High \nSchool \nGraduate Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Basic \nSkills Deficient Attending \nHigh School \nor Alternative \nSchool Attending \nPostsecondary \nbut Not Basic \nSkills \nDeficient \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 15.4 0.0 20.0 25.0 \nMales 14.3 0.0 20.0 0.0 \nFemales 16.7 0.0 20.0 33.3 \nEarnings of employed in quarter after exit (average)\n 3 $2,001 $1,666 $2,374 $1,420 \n$1 - $2,499 69.4 78.9 58.8 83.9 \n$2,500 - $4,999 25.0 21.1 29.4 9.7 $5,000 - $7,499 5.6 0.0 11.8 6.5 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $2,098 $2,226 $2,005 $1,898 \n$1 - $2,499 69.4 62.5 81.8 70.7 \n$2,500 - $4,999 25.0 29.2 18.2 24.4 \n$5,000 - $7,499 5.6 8.3 0.0 2.4 \n$7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 68.4 42.9 83.3 57.1 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 58.3 50.0 66.7 85.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 50.0 50.0 50.0 83.3 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $452 $-1,201 $2,105 $2,151 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $817 $-47 $1,392 $1,404 \nCredential rate3 22.7 12.5 28.6 57.1 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 62.5 66.7 50.0 36.0 \nDiploma attainment rate1 46.9 46.9 63.2 \nSkill attainment rate1 75.4 72.5 89.5 83.0 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 242Table IV-33 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Barriers to Employment \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n \nAll Exiters Homeless \nor \nRunaway \n \nOffender \nPregnant or \nParenting Needs \nAdditional \nAssistance \nNumber of exiters1 261 59 117 37 259 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 39.0 54.8 38.5 56.0 38.9 \nEmployment 34.6 48.4 35.4 52.0 34.4 \nEducation 4.4 6.5 3.1 4.0 4.4 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 18.8 18.8 27.3 50.0 19.0 \nSecondary school diploma 14.1 18.8 18.2 50.0 14.3 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCertificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.7 0.0 9.1 0.0 4.8 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters) 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.6 34.8 38.9 30.0 45.8 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.7 36.4 19.4 42.9 24.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.7 42.9 29.7 33.3 22.6 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 54.4 65.2 61.1 70.0 54.2 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 54.3 66.7 55.6 60.0 54.8 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 7.4 9.5 2.8 5.0 7.5 \nApprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 46.8 57.1 52.8 55.0 47.3 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)\n2 53.6 70.6 59.3 56.3 54.2 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 53.6 70.6 59.3 56.3 54.2 \n Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 243 \n \nAll Exiters Homeless \nor \nRunaway \n \nOffender \nPregnant or \nParenting Needs \nAdditional \nAssistance \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 17.6 0.0 0.0 14.3 17.6 \nMales 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.5 \nFemales 22.2 0.0 0.0 25.0 22.2 \nEarnings of employed in \nquarter after exit (average) 3 $1,732 $1,398 $2,191 $2,116 $1,742 \n$1 - $2,499 76.1 87.5 62.5 64.3 75.8 \n$2,500 - $4,999 17.9 6.3 25.0 28.6 18.2 \n$5,000 - $7,499 6.0 6.3 12.5 7.1 6.1 \n$7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3rd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,992 $2,070 $2,215 $3,041 $1,999 \n$1 - $2,499 70.1 66.7 70.4 50.0 69.3 \n$2,500 - $4,999 24.7 33.3 22.2 40.0 25.3 \n$5,000 - $7,499 3.9 0.0 7.4 0.0 4.0 \n$7,500 or more 1.3 0.0 0.0 10.0 1.3 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 65.4 62.5 61.5 63.6 65.4 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 68.4 80.0 50.0 25.0 68.4 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 62.5 100.0 50.0 0.0 62.5 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,078 $592 $-245 $-2,427 $1,078 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,037 $2,015 $-250 $-365 $1,037 \nCredential rate3 31.0 25.0 38.5 27.3 31.0 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 50.9 63.6 66.7 60.0 51.8 \nDiploma attainment rate1 51.5 50.0 43.8 62.5 50.7 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.9 74.0 77.4 64.7 79.7 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 244Table IV-34 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Low Income and Receipt of Public Assistance \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Public Assistance \n All Exiters Low Income Any TANF Other \nNumber of exiters1 261 255 43 40 18 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 39.0 39.0 31.0 30.8 33.3 \nEmployment 34.6 34.5 28.6 28.2 33.3 \nEducation 4.4 4.5 2.4 2.6 0.0 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 18.8 19.2 16.7 17.9 15.4 \nSecondary school diploma 14.1 14.4 16.7 17.9 15.4 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Certificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.7 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters)\n 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.6 45.0 48.8 50.0 50.0 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.7 23.4 18.2 19.0 20.0 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.7 23.3 19.2 20.0 14.3 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 54.4 55.0 51.2 50.0 50.0 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 54.3 54.9 45.5 45.0 55.6 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advanced training 7.4 7.7 4.5 5.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 46.8 47.3 40.9 40.0 55.6 \nRetention (3rd quarter after exit)\n2 53.6 52.4 43.8 42.9 66.7 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 53.6 52.4 43.8 42.9 66.7 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 245 Public Assistance \n All Exiters Low Income Any TANF Other \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 17.6 17.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMales 12.5 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 22.2 22.2 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in quarter \nafter exit (average) 3 $1,732 $1,751 $1,799 $1,522 $2,403 \n$1 - $2,499 76.1 75.0 76.9 83.3 57.1 \n$2,500 - $4,999 17.9 18.8 7.7 8.3 14.3 \n$5,000 - $7,499 6.0 6.3 15.4 8.3 28.6 $7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3\nrd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,992 $1,915 $2,065 $2,248 $1,777 \n$1 - $2,499 70.1 71.6 83.3 81.8 80.0 \n$2,500 - $4,999 24.7 24.3 8.3 9.1 20.0 \n$5,000 - $7,499 3.9 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 $7,500 or more 1.3 1.4 8.3 9.1 0.0 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 65.4 68.0 57.1 57.1 66.7 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 68.4 68.4 60.0 50.0 100.0 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 62.5 62.5 33.3 50.0 50.0 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,078 $1,078 $-1,934 $-2,549 $1,155 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,037 $1,037 $1,122 $1,660 $2,048 \nCredential rate3 31.0 32.1 14.3 14.3 33.3 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 50.9 49.1 33.3 37.5 50.0 \nDiploma attainment rate1 51.5 52.2 30.8 33.3 16.7 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.9 79.8 71.4 69.2 78.9 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 246Table IV-35 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Selected Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n All Exiters Limited English-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Basic Skills \nDeficient \nNumber of exiters1 261 23 109 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 39.0 33.3 34.7 \nEmployment 34.6 26.7 30.6 \nEducation 4.4 6.7 4.1 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 18.8 50.0 22.2 \nSecondary school diploma 14.1 50.0 16.0 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCertificate or postsecondary \ndegree 4.7 0.0 6.2 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters) 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 45.6 36.8 48.5 \nPlacement (quarter after exit)3 24.7 16.7 24.6 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 23.7 50.0 19.6 \nNot attending secondary school at \nexit1 54.4 63.2 51.5 \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 54.3 45.5 48.8 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 7.4 9.1 7.0 \nApprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 46.8 36.4 41.9 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)\n2 53.6 37.5 50.0 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 53.6 37.5 50.0 \n Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 247 All Exiters Limited English-\nLanguage \nProficiency Single \nParent Pell Grant \nRecipient Basic Skills \nDeficient \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 17.6 0.0 16.7 \nMales 12.5 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 22.2 0.0 33.3 \nEarnings of employed in quarter \nafter exit (average) 3 $1,732 $1,364 $1,869 \n$1 - $2,499 76.1 80.0 75.0 \n$2,500 - $4,999 17.9 20.0 18.8 \n$5,000 - $7,499 6.0 0.0 6.3 \n$7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3rd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,992 $3,025 $1,403 \n$1 - $2,499 70.1 75.0 82.1 \n$2,500 - $4,999 24.7 0.0 15.4 \n$5,000 - $7,499 3.9 0.0 2.6 \n$7,500 or more 1.3 25.0 0.0 \nOlder Youth WIA Performance \nand 12-Month Outcomes \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit, excludes employed at entry)3 65.4 50.0 54.5 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 68.4 33.3 70.0 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 62.5 0.0 60.0 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,078 $-975 $2,017 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,037 $-365 $1,398 \nCredential rate3 31.0 16.7 46.2 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 50.9 33.3 42.3 \nDiploma attainment rate1 51.5 50.0 40.0 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.9 59.3 79.2 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 248Table IV-36 \nOutcomes of Youth Exiters, by Youth Activities \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Educational \nAchievement \nServices Employment \nServices Summer \nEmployment \nOpportunities Leadership \nDevelopment \nOpportunities Additional \nSupport \nfor Youth \nNumber of exiters1 187 193 142 123 177 \nYouth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 32.4 41.5 30.7 32.3 35.6 \nEmployment 29.4 37.4 26.3 30.2 31.9 \nEducation 2.9 4.1 4.4 2.1 3.7 \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 20.8 25.0 11.8 18.1 19.6 \nSecondary school diploma 14.9 17.5 11.8 12.0 13.7 \nGED or equivalency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nCertificate or postsecondary \ndegree 5.9 7.5 0.0 6.0 5.9 \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains \n(not based on exiters) 2 \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 47.7 39.5 60.0 56.9 47.7 \nPlacement (quarter after \nexit)3 20.8 26.7 24.0 23.9 24.1 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)2 22.0 27.8 22.7 23.1 24.4 \nNot attending secondary school \nat exit1 52.3 60.5 40.0 43.1 52.3 \n Placement (quarter after \nexit)3 47.0 55.7 44.2 50.0 50.8 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 6.1 7.1 9.3 5.6 7.7 Apprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEmployment 40.9 48.6 34.9 44.4 43.1 \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit)\n2 56.9 53.1 45.7 58.3 48.5 \nPostsecondary education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nAdvanced training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nApprenticeships 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nMilitary service 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Employment 56.9 53.1 45.7 58.3 48.5 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 249 Educational \nAchievement \nServices Employment \nServices Summer \nEmployment \nOpportunities Leadership \nDevelopment \nOpportunities Additional \nSupport \nfor Youth \nOther Outcomes \nNontraditional employment \n(quarter after exit)3 27.3 23.1 25.0 28.6 18.2 \nMales 16.7 20.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 \nFemales 40.0 25.0 0.0 100.0 40.0 \nEarnings of employed in \nquarter after exit (average) 3 $1,668 $1,725 $1,569 $1,417 $1,493 \n$1 - $2,499 76.7 76.0 84.4 78.1 78.7 \n$2,500 - $4,999 20.9 18.0 9.4 21.9 19.1 \n$5,000 - $7,499 2.3 6.0 6.3 0.0 2.1 \n$7,500 or more 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nEarnings of employed in 3rd \nquarter after exit (average)2 $1,881 $2,056 $1,880 $1,959 $1,875 \n$1 - $2,499 71.9 66.7 75.6 75.6 72.1 \n$2,500 - $4,999 21.9 27.8 19.5 17.8 23.0 \n$5,000 - $7,499 4.7 3.7 2.4 4.4 3.3 \n$7,500 or more 1.6 1.9 2.4 2.2 1.6 \nOlder Youth WIA \nPerformance and 12-Month \nOutcomes \nEntered employment (quarter \nafter exit, excludes employed at entry)\n3 64.7 68.4 50.0 77.8 57.9 \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit2 70.6 69.2 71.4 62.5 64.7 \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit4 64.3 60.0 71.4 66.7 60.0 \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit2 $1,133 $671 $2,439 $276 $947 \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit4 $1,078 $658 $1,718 $448 $921 \nCredential rate3 36.8 40.9 11.1 50.0 31.8 \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 54.8 48.9 47.8 58.3 45.2 \nDiploma attainment rate1 50.0 49.1 45.2 66.7 56.3 \nSkill attainment rate1 79.8 78.4 81.6 85.6 79.2 \n \n1 Based on exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 . \n2 Based on exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. \n3 Based on exiters from October 2007 to September 2008. \n4 Based on exiters from Ja nuary 2007 to December 2007. \n Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 250Table IV-37 \nYouth Common Measures, by Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Basic Literacy Skills Deficient \nOut-of-School Youth with \nParticipation Years Ending \nJuly 2009 to June 2010 \n Number \nof \nExitersPlaced in \nEmployment \nor EducationAttained \nDegree or \nCertificate Literacy and Numeracy Gains \nNumber of exiters 252 39.0 18.8 \nStatewide programs Local programs 252 39.0 18.8 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 45 16.3 0.0 16 to 17 96 39.7 17.0 \n18 54 42.1 47.4 \n19 to 21 57 67.9 54.5 \nGender \nFemale 109 48.7 31.8 Male 143 32.1 11.9 \nIndividual with a disability 165 33.3 15.9 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic Not Hispanic \n American Indian or Alaskan Native (only) \n Asian (only) \nBlack or African American (only) 12 50.0 16.7 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) \n White (only) 226 37.7 18.3 \n More than one race \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) \nEmployed at participation \n \nEmployed \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 244 39.0 17.1 \nHomeless or runaway youth 54 54.8 18.8 \nOffender 99 38.5 27.3 \nPregnant or parenting youth 40 56.0 50.0 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 126 34.7 22.2 \nEver in foster care 59 40.9 20.6 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 251 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Basic Literacy Skills Deficient \nOut-of-School Youth with \nParticipation Years Ending \nJuly 2009 to June 2010 \n Number \nof \nExitersPlaced in \nEmployment \nor EducationAttained \nDegree or \nCertificate Literacy and Numeracy Gains \nNumber of exiters 252 39.0 18.8 0 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 250 38.9 19.0 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnin gs (amon g age 19 to 21 ) \nNone 29 50.0 60.0 \n$1 to $1,499 15 100.0 33.3 $1,500 to $2,999 $3,000 to $4,499 $5,000 or more \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 11 37.5 44.4 \nSingle parent 23 33.3 50.0 \nUI status \n \nClaimant \nClaimant referred by WPRS \nExhaustee \nLow income 246 39.0 19.2 \nPublic assistance recipient 47 31.0 16.7 \nTANF recipient 44 30.8 17.9 \nOther public assistance 19 33.3 15.4 \nPell Grant recipient 9 66.7 25.0 \nHighest grade completed \n8th or less 44 17.9 2.7 \nSome high school 164 37.4 27.1 \nHigh school graduate 32 73.9 0.0 \nHigh school equivalency 9 80.0 0.0 Some postsecondary \nCollege graduate (4-year) \nSchool status at participation \n \nAttending school 125 26.9 18.3 \nHigh school or below 122 26.9 18.8 Alternative school Postsecondary \nNot attending school 127 56.8 23.1 \nHigh school dropout 86 45.7 30.0 High school grad./equiv. 41 75.0 0.0 Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 252Table IV-38 \nYouth Common Measures, by Services Received \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Basic Literacy Skills \nDeficient Out-of-School \nYouth with Participation \nYears Ending \nJuly 2009 to June 2010 \n Number \nof \nExiters Placed in \nEmployment or \nEducation (%)Attained \nDegree or \nCertificate \n(%) Literacy and Numeracy Gains \n(%) \nNumber of exiters 252 39.0 18.8 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult \nWIA dislocated worker \nPartner program 32 55.6 40.0 \nWagner-Peyser 32 55.6 40.0 TAA \nNational Farmworker Jobs \nVeterans programs \nVocational Education Adult Education \nOther partner prog. \nWeeks participated \n26 or fewer weeks 81 30.4 5.7 \n26 to 52 weeks 82 50.8 31.6 \n52 to 78 weeks 67 28.6 19.1 More than 78 weeks 22 52.9 12.5 \nYouth Activities (among \nwith activities) \nEducational achievement \nservices 193 32.4 20.8 \nEmployment services 177 41.5 25.0 \nSummer youth employment opportunities 138 30.7 11.8 \nLeadership development \nactivities 127 32.3 18.1 \nAdditional support for \nyouth services 191 35.6 19.6 \nRec. 12 months follow-up 84 42.7 24.5 \nNeeds-related payments \nOther supportive services 141 45.2 23.1 \nEnrolled in Education 150 30.0 18.8 \nPell Grant Recipient 9 66.7 25.0 \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters before July 1, 2009 . Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 253This page intentionally blank. Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 254Table IV-39 \nYouth Common Measures, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Basic Literacy Skills Deficient \nOut-of-School Youth with \nParticipation Years Ending \nJuly 2009 to June 2010 \n Number \nof \nExiters Placed in \nEmploymen t\nor Educatio n\n(%) Attained \nDegree or \nCertificate \n(%) Literacy and Numeracy \nGains (%) \nNation 114,783 53.3 51.6 39.4 \nAlabama 845 49.5 43.6 27.4 Alaska 620 52.6 63.1 23.8 Arizona 1,240 58.0 65.5 40.1 \nArkansas 944 78.4 78.0 69.9 \nCalifornia 12,663 71.3 57.3 46.1 Colorado 1,351 65.9 62.7 37.5 Connecticut 546 69.6 82.9 32.3 Delaware 133 67.6 75.8 41.4 \nDistrict of Columbia 304 48.8 40.4 26.1 \nFlorida 4,946 50.3 58.9 40.3 Georgia 2,140 56.0 54.4 30.4 Hawaii 285 44.7 59.0 32.4 Idaho 482 66.9 73.4 11.2 Illinois 3,212 67.2 69.7 51.3 \nIndiana 3,847 53.6 51.7 27.2 \nIowa 531 65.4 48.7 19.7 Kansas 623 63.8 63.1 43.8 Kentucky 1,634 65.1 65.5 56.5 Louisiana 1,357 54.6 54.3 52.8 \nMaine 321 63.6 65.2 1.0 \nMaryland 701 67.8 75.0 74.2 Massachusetts 1,765 72.6 57.6 25.5 Michigan 5,052 55.9 48.3 6.5 Minnesota 1,541 62.0 54.3 21.2 Mississippi 4,002 67.3 71.7 53.1 \nMissouri 1,896 68.4 50.4 48.2 \nMontana 264 71.4 65.6 23.4 Nebraska 311 73.2 65.7 53.1 Nevada 344 56.6 57.0 35.0 New Hampshire 331 43.9 53.3 69.0 \nNew Jersey 1,837 62.1 67.5 51.7 Vermont Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 255 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Basic Literacy Skills Deficient \nOut-of-School Youth with \nParticipation Years Ending \nJuly 2009 to June 2010 \n Number \nof \nExiters Placed in \nEmploymen t\nor Educatio n\n(%) Attained \nDegree or \nCertificate \n(%) Literacy and Numeracy \nGains (%) \nNew Mexico 1,080 54.6 41.2 26.1 \nNew York 7,029 66.9 61.3 41.1 \nNorth Carolina 1,534 63.1 59.8 40.0 \nNorth Dakota 297 68.6 55.8 49.0 Ohio 4,488 53.2 58.3 39.7 Oklahoma 582 57.9 38.2 29.7 Oregon 1,382 63.0 72.5 31.4 Pennsylvania 3,386 50.5 66.0 44.5 \nPuerto Rico 17,424 16.5 14.7 \nRhode Island 479 31.8 28.1 48.6 South Carolina 3,105 53.7 50.6 48.0 South Dakota 275 67.1 60.7 21.9 Tennessee 5,060 55.6 56.7 33.3 \nTexas 6,562 60.3 50.9 46.4 \nUtah 612 55.4 64.6 30.9 Vermont 252 39.0 18.8 Virgin Islands 125 36.1 23.2 4.5 Virginia 1,478 35.1 35.2 4.4 Washington 1,883 63.6 72.3 50.1 \nWest Virginia 470 60.4 76.1 47.6 \nWisconsin 1,004 54.3 67.5 17.6 Wyoming 208 61.3 57.0 31.3 Younger Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 256Table IV-40 \nPerformance Outcomes of Younger Yo uth Exiters, by Characteristics \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2009 to March 2010 \n Number of \nExiters Retention \nRate Number of \nExiters Diploma \nAttainment Skill \nAttainment \nAll exiters 223 50.9 202 51.5 79.9 \nStatewide programs \nLocal programs 223 50.9 202 51.5 79.9 \nAge categories \n14 to 15 63 33.3 35 86.8 \n16 to 17 118 41.4 110 47.4 75.5 18 42 64.0 57 56.7 82.1 \nGender \nFemale 80 50.0 92 56.1 76.2 \nMale 143 51.6 110 44.4 83.3 \nIndividual with a disability 171 41.7 139 45.7 77.6 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic 10 40.0 \nNot Hispanic \n American Indian or \n Alaskan Native (only) \n Asian (only) \n Black or African \n American (only) 84.6 \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) \n White (only) 200 50.0 187 50.8 79.5 \n More than one race \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed \nNot employed or received \nlayoff notice 221 49.1 197 51.5 80.3 \nHomeless or runaway youth 23 63.6 36 50.0 74.0 \nOffender 81 66.7 79 43.8 77.4 \nPregnant or parenting youth 14 60.0 20 62.5 64.7 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 134 42.3 95 40.0 79.2 Vermont Younger Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 257 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2009 to March 2010 \n Number of \nExiters Retention \nRate Number of \nExiters Diploma \nAttainment Skill \nAttainment \nAll exiters 223 50.9 202 51.5 79.9 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 53 69.2 43 63.6 79.4 \nLimited English-language \nproficiency 220 51.8 200 50.7 79.7 \nSingle parent 100.0 \nUI status \nClaimant 16 50.0 59.3 \nClaimant referred by WPRS \nExhaustee \nLow income \nPublic assistance recipient 219 49.1 197 52.2 79.8 \nTANF recipient 38 33.3 36 30.8 71.4 \nOther public assistance 35 37.5 33 33.3 69.2 \nPell Grant recipient 12 50.0 16 16.7 78.9 \nHighest grade completed \n8th or less 52 0.0 34 28.6 79.7 \nSome high school 160 51.1 149 54.1 78.8 \nHigh school graduate 14 88.9 \nHigh school equivalency Some postsecondary \nCollege graduate (4-year) \nSchool status at participation \nAttending school 164 38.5 105 63.2 83.2 \nHigh school or below 163 36.0 103 63.2 83.0 Alternative school \nPostsecondary \nNot attending school 59 61.3 97 46.9 75.0 \nHigh school dropout 49 66.7 80 46.9 72.5 High school graduate/equiv. 10 50.0 17 89.5 \n Younger Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 258Table IV-41 \nPerformance Outcomes of Younger Yout h Exiters, by Services Received \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2009 to March 2010 \n Number of \nExiters Retention \nRate Number of \nExiters Diploma \nAttainment Skill \nAttainment \nNumber of exiters 223 50.9 202 51.5 79.9 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult \nWIA dislocated worker Partner program 9 80.0 26 50.0 83.3 \nWagner-Peyser 9 80.0 17 50.0 86.2 TAA National Farmworker Jobs \nVeterans programs \nVocational Education Adult Education Other partner programs 9 78.9 \nWeeks participated \nUnder 26 weeks 77 61.1 52 44.4 76.1 \n26 to 52 weeks 69 44.0 74 51.7 80.7 52 to 78 weeks 60 54.5 58 55.6 82.5 More than 78 weeks 17 33.3 18 50.0 75.0 \nYouth Activities (among with activities) \nEducational achievement services 193 54.8 151 50.0 79.8 \nEmployment services 133 48.9 147 49.1 78.4 \nSummer youth employment \nopportunities 152 47.8 121 45.2 81.6 \nLeadership development activities 145 58.3 98 66.7 85.6 \nAdditional support for youth services 187 45.2 135 56.3 79.2 \nReceived 12 months of follow-up services 126 52.4 34 37.5 89.5 \nNeeds-related payments \nOther supportive services 90 61.3 112 53.5 77.2 \nEnrolled in Education 179 37.0 121 63.2 83.2 \nPell Grant Recipient \n \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters before July 1, 2009 . Vermont Younger Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 259This page intentionally blank. Younger Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 260Table IV-42 \nPerformance Outcomes of Younger Youth Exiters, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2009 to March 2010 \n Number of \nExiters Retention \nRate Number of \nExiters Diploma \nAttainment Skill \nAttainment \nNation 87,842 63.6 84,248 63.7 80.4 \nAlabama 493 52.1 372 43.1 72.3 \nAlaska 399 59.9 430 85.1 92.3 \nArizona 927 66.4 911 78.4 84.3 Arkansas 729 85.8 822 87.9 95.3 California 8,038 79.9 8,693 72.9 86.6 Colorado 753 48.5 865 60.4 70.5 Connecticut 317 80.0 295 74.4 86.2 \nDelaware 128 68.5 105 63.8 88.7 \nDistrict of Columbia 289 40.9 128 64.7 45.8 Florida 2,974 60.5 3,276 53.3 87.5 Georgia 1,691 62.1 1,451 74.4 86.8 Hawaii 298 47.8 240 64.9 92.4 \nIdaho 359 69.0 307 71.1 100.0 \nIllinois 2,122 54.1 3,561 57.1 55.9 Indiana 1,907 60.7 2,103 47.5 67.2 Iowa 326 72.8 339 70.5 63.0 Kansas 558 66.1 452 62.2 52.5 Kentucky 1,233 61.8 1,119 69.7 53.0 \nLouisiana 787 60.0 798 42.7 80.1 \nMaine 206 66.5 236 81.7 89.0 Maryland 694 62.4 565 74.6 72.5 Massachusetts 1,222 67.8 1,446 69.2 87.4 Michigan 5,163 71.9 4,270 84.8 95.3 \nMinnesota 1,223 76.4 1,263 87.9 92.8 \nMississippi 3,006 72.3 2,729 68.4 92.7 Missouri 1,283 56.3 1,049 42.2 Montana 172 59.5 201 62.0 100.0 Nebraska 168 68.1 133 51.7 80.4 Nevada 464 32.9 219 61.1 64.2 \nNew Hampshire 245 64.0 263 84.8 81.9 \nNew Jersey 2,529 62.6 1,540 79.6 92.6 New Mexico 854 65.6 755 38.8 71.3 New York 5,461 65.3 5,242 52.2 55.3 North Carolina 1,284 52.3 1,079 64.5 70.0 Vermont Younger Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 261 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2009 to March 2010 \n Number of \nExiters Retention \nRate Number of \nExiters Diploma \nAttainment Skill \nAttainment \nNorth Dakota 186 72.3 228 59.1 55.6 \nOhio 2,767 58.7 3,283 73.0 73.7 \nOklahoma 460 62.4 436 40.2 68.7 Oregon 1,225 58.7 1,028 72.4 53.4 Pennsylvania 2,445 48.9 2,907 47.4 Puerto Rico 17,670 64.1 13,894 57.2 92.0 \nRhode Island 202 55.1 510 46.4 86.9 \nSouth Carolina 1,437 54.5 1,900 42.5 50.0 South Dakota 299 70.3 158 61.6 85.4 Tennessee 3,152 60.0 3,815 66.9 90.4 Texas 5,158 4,144 70.8 Utah 261 52.9 423 54.7 \nVermont 223 50.9 202 51.5 79.9 \nVirgin Islands 45 26.3 101 2.9 42.6 Virginia 965 52.7 1,223 56.5 75.8 Washington 1,472 60.2 1,481 68.5 89.0 West Virginia 500 49.3 322 58.5 51.0 \nWisconsin 933 57.4 775 68.1 86.1 \nWyoming 140 62.3 161 67.0 66.7 Older Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 262Table IV-43 \nPerformance Outcomes of Older Youth Exiters, by Characteristics \n((Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof \nExiters Entered \nEmploymen t\nRate (%) Credential \nRate (%) Number \nof \nExitersEmployment \nRetention \nRate (%) Earnings \nChange \n($) \nNumber of exiters 57 65.4 31.0 58 68.4 1,078 \nStatewide programs \nLocal programs 57 65.4 31.0 58 68.4 1,078 \nAge categories \n19 to 21 57 65.4 31.0 58 68.4 1,078 \nGender \nFemale 31 60.0 35.3 31 50.0 844 \nMale 26 72.7 25.0 27 76.9 1,186 \nIndividual with a disability 37 53.3 35.3 45 78.6 1,535 \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic Not Hispanic \n American Indian or \n Alaskan Native (only) \n Asian (only) \nBlack or African American (only) \nHawaiian or other Pacific \nIslander (only) \n White (only) 49 61.9 29.2 53 64.7 1,380 \n More than one race \nVeteran (among age 19 to 21) \nEmployed at participation \n \nEmployed \nNot employed or received layoff notice 55 65.4 32.1 56 68.4 1,078 \nHomeless or runaway youth 23 62.5 25.0 20 80.0 592 \nOffender 29 61.5 38.5 16 50.0 -245 \nPregnant or parenting youth 20 63.6 27.3 19 25.0 -2,427 \nBasic literacy skills deficient 20 54.5 46.2 31 70.0 2,017 \nEver in foster care 14 57.1 25.0 11 75.0 741 Vermont Older Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 263 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof \nExiters Entered \nEmploymen t\nRate (%) Credential \nRate (%) Number \nof \nExitersEmployment \nRetention \nRate (%) Earnings \nChange \n($) \nNumber of exiters 57 65.4 31 58 68.4 1,078 \nYouth who needs additional \nassistance 57 65.4 31.0 58 68.4 1,078 \nAverage preprogram quarterly \nearnings (among age 19 to 21) \nNone 29 46.7 31.3 26 70.0 1,701 \n$1 to $1,499 15 100.0 50.0 21 66.7 2,911 \n$1,500 to $2,999 \n$3,000 to $4,499 $5,000 or more \nLimited English-language \nproficiency \nSingle parent 10 50.0 16.7 11 33.3 -975 \nUI status \n \nClaimant \nClaimant referred by WPRS \nExhaustee \nLow income 56 68.0 32.1 58 68.4 1,078 \nPublic assistance recipient 9 57.1 14.3 13 60.0 -1,934 \nTANF recipient 9 57.1 14.3 12 50.0 -2,549 \nOther public assistance \nPell Grant recipient \nHighest grade com pleted \n8th or less \nSome high school 26 58.3 38.5 32 69.2 604 \nHigh school graduate 19 87.5 20.0 19 50.0 461 \nHigh school equivalency Some postsecondary College graduate (4-year) \nSchool status at \npartici pation \nAttending school 10 57.1 57.1 12 85.7 2,151 \nHigh school or below 10 57.1 57.1 12 85.7 2,151 \nAlternative school Postsecondary \nNot attending school 47 68.4 22.7 46 58.3 452 \nHigh school dropout 21 42.9 12.5 23 50.0 -1,201 \nHigh school graduate/equiv. 26 83.3 28.6 23 66.7 2,105 Older Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 264Table IV-44 \nPerformance Outcomes of Older Youth, by Services Received \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof \nExiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nRate (%) Number \nof \nExiters Employment \nRetention \nRate (%) Earnings \nChange \n($) \nNumber of exiters 57 65.4 31.0 58 68.4 1,078 \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult \nWIA dislocated worker \nPartner program 15 50.0 0.0 17 100.0 5,444 \nWagner-Peyser 15 50.0 0.0 17 100.0 5,444 TAA \nNational Farmworker \nJobs \nVeterans programs \nVocational Education Adult Education \nOther partner programs \nWeeks participated \n(average) \n26 or fewer weeks 22 50.0 0.0 15 100.0 581 \n26 to 52 weeks 20 61.5 38.5 20 50.0 1,415 \n52 to 78 weeks 10 100.0 33.3 19 77.8 285 \nMore than 78 weeks \nYouth Activities (among \nwith activities) \nEducational achievement \nservices 42 64.7 36.8 49 70.6 1,133 \nEmployment services 41 68.4 40.9 41 69.2 671 \nSummer youth \nemployment opportunities 17 50.0 11.1 21 71.4 2,439 \nLeadership development \nactivities 21 77.8 50.0 27 62.5 276 \nAdditional support for \nyouth services 44 57.9 31.8 52 64.7 947 \nReceived 12 months of \nfollow-up services 13 72.7 25.0 24 71.4 1,192 \nNeeds-related payments \nOther supportive services 41 73.7 35.0 34 58.3 516 \nEnrolled in Education 20 66.7 36.4 21 75.0 1,035 \nPell Grant Recipient \nNote: 12 months of follow-up data is based on exiters before July 1, 2009 . Vermont Older Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 265This page intentionally blank Older Youth Vermont \nSocial Policy Research Associates 266Table IV-45 \nPerformance Outcomes of Older Youth Exiters, by State \n(Derived from PY 2009Q4 WIASRD Records) \n \n Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof Exiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nRate (%) Number \nof Exiters Employment \nRetention \nRate (%) Earnings \nChange \n($) \nNation 32,394 60.3 36.4 32,495 80.7 3,440 \nAlabama 417 57.8 27.1 429 76.5 3,880 \nAlaska 134 63.5 42.7 115 79.1 3,168 Arizona 362 69.3 47.6 357 80.6 3,522 Arkansas 144 83.3 45.7 113 92.1 5,999 California 4,209 71.4 34.9 4,395 92.4 3,464 Colorado 505 68.3 43.1 461 70.0 2,366 \nConnecticut 303 66.0 52.4 208 92.9 4,920 \nDelaware 29 81.8 78.6 31 72.4 1,379 District of Columbia 78 49.3 17.9 79 64.9 5,975 Florida 1,607 61.2 41.1 1,511 76.6 3,607 Georgia 714 54.7 35.5 767 81.0 4,009 \nHawaii 19 50.0 27.8 18 66.7 1,739 \nIdaho 150 78.6 61.3 123 75.9 2,429 Illinois 1,205 63.7 37.5 1,445 73.2 3,607 Indiana 1,737 58.7 28.6 1,616 78.6 2,331 Iowa 198 71.9 47.6 203 93.6 4,256 Kansas 184 58.7 33.1 206 77.9 3,240 \nKentucky 484 70.9 45.4 520 82.0 3,887 \nLouisiana 552 59.9 34.3 497 83.7 3,958 Maine 116 73.8 58.4 120 81.2 3,792 Maryland 136 74.8 61.5 185 70.8 3,363 Massachusetts 431 75.9 51.9 477 81.5 4,785 \nMichigan 1,230 77.0 70.6 1,220 86.3 3,468 \nMinnesota 362 75.8 60.6 364 82.3 3,928 Mississippi 1,174 62.4 30.9 1,001 82.3 3,852 Missouri 724 71.8 20.7 813 73.7 3,654 Montana 72 70.0 34.8 63 80.0 3,682 Nebraska 183 73.1 48.5 193 83.0 2,971 \nNevada 76 54.7 25.7 97 75.5 2,203 \nNew Hampshire 64 55.2 41.9 38 75.0 2,059 New Jersey 303 74.8 52.0 385 76.2 3,016 New Mexico 265 57.2 13.0 264 82.8 2,931 New York 1,785 65.4 37.3 1,716 75.8 3,127 Vermont Older Youth \nSocial Policy Research Associates 267 Exiters from \nOctober 2008 to September 2009 Exiters from \nApril 2008 to March 2009 \n Number \nof Exiters Entered \nEmployment \nRate (%) Credential \nRate (%) Number \nof Exiters Employment \nRetention \nRate (%) Earnings \nChange \n($) \nNorth Carolina 453 62.3 32.7 475 77.0 2,646 \nNorth Dakota 91 65.5 23.8 74 78.4 3,134 Ohio 1,392 57.6 39.5 1,337 74.7 6,461 Oklahoma 177 59.8 26.7 190 82.4 3,883 Oregon 353 61.3 38.8 419 70.4 2,200 \nPennsylvania 956 52.9 34.9 1,042 78.5 2,906 \nPuerto Rico 2,603 13.1 21.7 2,627 86.7 2,955 Rhode Island 96 65.8 33.7 65 78.3 1,201 South Carolina 1,227 58.9 29.4 979 78.0 2,168 South Dakota 100 73.7 40.0 102 88.6 Tennessee 1,220 65.0 44.6 1,091 80.4 4,136 \nTexas 2,135 65.5 30.1 2,420 80.0 3,814 \nUtah 250 57.3 38.8 236 77.4 3,546 Vermont 57 65.4 31.0 58 68.4 1,078 Virgin Islands 50 38.5 18.4 16 83.3 2,994 Virginia 303 50.2 28.2 296 77.0 3,042 \nWashington 480 70.5 45.1 508 74.7 3,740 \nWest Virginia 109 57.3 34.6 167 74.5 2,564 Wisconsin 318 55.4 34.2 316 80.9 3,973 Wyoming 72 62.0 27.7 47 78.8 7,641 \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates 269 \n \n \nAppendix A \nNotes to Tables Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 271Notes to Tables \nPart I: Summary Comparisons Across Programs \nTable I-1 \n This table shows trends in the number of exiters by program of participation. \nSubcategories do not sum to totals because i ndividuals may be included in more than one \nsubcategory. For example, a person may be co enrolled in both a local program and a statewide \nprogram. \nTable I-2 This table shows the number of exiters by state and program of participation. Both statewide and local programs are included. NEG programs are included in the dislocated worker and total \ncolumns. \nTable I-3 This table shows the number of exiters with selected characteristics by program of participation. \nBoth statewide and local program s are included. NEG programs are included in the dislocated \nworker and total columns. \nTable I-4 \nto \nTable I-7 These tables show trends over time in the number of exiters by state. Table I-4 shows trends in \nthe number of exiters for adults. Table I-5 show s dislocated workers who participated in state \nand local (formula-funded) programs. Table I-6 shows dislocated workers who participated in \nNational Emergency Grant (NEG) projects. Table I-7 shows youth. \nThere was a large increase in adult exiters from PY 2005 to PY 2006: from 252,065 to 624,648 \nwith continued increases in later years. Most of this increase occurred in New York, which \nincreased from 31,990 to 304,08 3. Most of this increase likel y occurred because of changes in \npractices regarding coenrollment between WIA and Wagner-Peyser. There are also significant \nincreases in Louisiana and Oklahoma. Mississi ppi also increased but then declined in \nsubsequent years. \nThere was also a substantial incr ease in dislocated wo rker exiters in formula-funded programs: \nfrom 155,526 to 230,838 between PY 2005 and PY 2006. Again most of this increase was in \nNew York: from 17,260 to 82,666. This New York increase also likely resulted from changes in \ncoenrollment practices. There was also a large increase in Mississippi, followed by a decline in \nPY 2007. \nThere was a large increase in exiters from NEG projects from PY 2004 to PY 2005 and a \ndecrease in subsequent years. Most of these ch anges over time are due to a single NEG project \nin Texas (TX11), which increased from zero in PY 2004 to 65,209 in PY 2005 and then dropped \nto 20,936 in PY 2006 and 2,066 in PY 2007. \nPart II: Adult Exiters \n Tables in Part II include all exiters from adult programs, including both local and statewide \nprograms. \nTable II-1 \nto Table II-13 These tables show the characteristics of adult ex iters. Most numbers shown are the percentages \nwithin the column heading. Exceptions include the number of exiters shown in the first three \nrows, which are counts, and preprogram earnings and average highest grade completed, for \nwhich both averages and percentage s within categories are shown. \nIn calculating percentages, individuals with missing data on either the row or column heading are \nexcluded. Values of zero are excluded wh en calculating average preprogram earnings \nSome characteristics, those shown under “Charact eristics of Exiters who Received Intensive or \nTraining Services,” are available only for individuals who received in tensive or training services. \nPercentages for these characteristics are calculated within this smaller universe, again excluding \nmissing data. \nTable II-1 to \nTable II-2 These tables show trends over time in the ch aracteristics of exiters fo r both the state and the \nnation. \nTable II-2 shows counts of exite rs with particular characteristic s. These counts exclude missing \ndata and cannot be used to compute the percentages in Table II-1. Also, the counts for the Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 272characteristics under the heading “Characteristics of Exiters who Received Training or Intensive \nServices” do not include indivi duals who received only core services and, thus, are an \nunderestimate of the total number of persons with the characteristic who were served by WIA. \nSee the notes to Tables I-4 to I-7 for discussion of some of the significant changes in the number \nof exiters. \nTable II-7 \nto Table II-10 These tables are based only on individuals who received intensive or training services because \nthis is the universe for which the column headings are available. Some of these tables include a \ncolumn labeled “With Intensive or Training Servi ces,” which represents all individuals for whom \ndata on the column headings is collected and is the appropriate comparison for the other columns \n(rather than the data in other tables for all exiters). \nTable II-11 This table shows the characteristics of individu als by major service categories. The column \nheadings “Core Services Only,” “Core and In tensive Services Only,” and “Training” are \nmutually exclusive and exhaustive. An individual is included in one and only one of these \ncolumns. \nTable II-12 This table shows the number of individuals w ith specified characteristics by major service \ncategories. Missing data are excluded from thes e counts. Therefore, they cannot be used to \ncalculate the percentages shown in Table II-11, which exclude missing data from the \ndenominator of percentages. \nThe number of exiters shown fo r characteristics that are available only for individuals who \nreceived intensive or training services is a subs tantial undercount of the total number with these \ncharacteristics because individuals who receiv e only core services are not counted. \nThe column headings “Core Services Only,” “Cor e and Intensive Services Only,” and “Training” \nare mutually exclusive and exhaustive. An individual is included in one and only one of these \ncolumns. \nTable II-14 \nto Table II-23 These tables show the services received by ex iters. Most numbers shown are the percentages \nwithin the column heading. Exceptions include the number of exiters shown in the first row, which is a count, and weeks participated, for which both the average and percentages within \ncategories are shown. \nIn calculating percentages, individuals with missing data on either the row or column heading are \nexcluded. \nThe row headings “Core services, including sta ff-assisted, only,” “Intensive & core services \nonly,” and “Training services” are mutually exclusive and exhaustive. An individual is included \nin one and only one of these rows. \nThe percentages shown for the six types of trai ning—on-the-job, skill upgrading & retraining, \nentrepreneurial training, ABE or ESL in combin ation with training, cu stomized training, and \nother occupational skills training—are calculated among those who received training. There is \nno clear distinction between skill upgrading & retr aining and other occupational skills training. \nTable II-14 \nto Table II-15 These table show trends over time in the servi ces received by exiters for both the state and the \nnation. \nSee the notes to Tables I-4 to I-7 for discussion of some of the significant changes in the number \nof exiters. The large increase in exiters in New York between PY 2005 and PY 2006 likely \nexplains many of the changes in services between those two periods. In particular. The increase \nin the percentage receivi ng only core services (from 24.4% to 67.2%) likely occurs because over \n80% of exiters in New York in PY 2006 and later years received only core services. Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 273Table II-20 \nto \nTable II-23 These tables are based only on individuals who received intensive or training services because \nthis is the universe for which the column headings are available. Some of these tables include a \ncolumn labeled “With Intensive or Training Servi ces,” which represents all individuals for whom \ndata on the column headings is collected and is the appropriate comparison for the other columns \n(rather than the data in other tables for all exiters). \nBecause these tables show servi ces for a universe that is lim ited to individuals who receive \nintensive or training services, they should be in terpreted with caution. For example, Table II-22 \nindicates the percentage of low-income indivi duals receive training. However, because low-\nincome individuals who receive onl y core services are excluded, the true percentage receiving \ntraining may be considerably less. \nTable II-24 This table shows services provided by state. Th e column for number of exiters shows the count \nof exiters in the state. The remaining columns sh ow the percentage within the state that received \nthe service identified by the column heading. These values can be compared with the national \nvalues in the first row. Thus, unlike most other tables, this table presents row percentages, not \ncolumn percentages. \nThe distribution among the service categories within a state may be strongly affected by policies \nand practices regarding paymen t for services by WIA and Wagner-Peyser and coenrollment \nbetween the two programs. For example, Dela ware shows that 98.8% of exiters received \ntraining, possibly because Wagner-Peyser funds were used for core and intensive services. \nConversely, in New York 83.4% of exiters received only co re services, possibly because of \nextensive coenrollment with Wagner-Peyser. \nTable II-25 \nto \nTable II-36 These tables calculate each outcome for the most recent year’s worth of exiters for whom the \noutcome data is available, with the exception of Tables II-25 and II-26, which show time trends. \nIndividuals who were reported as institutionalized or deceased at exit, those who had medical \nconditions that precluded continued participation in WIA or entry into employment or continued \nparticipation in the program, those providing car e to a family member with a health/medical \ncondition that precludes entry into employment or continued participation in the program, returning Reservists who choose not to continue WIA services, and individuals who did not \nprovide a valid Social Security number are exclud ed from the calculations. However, they are \nincluded in the number of exiters shown. \nAll outcomes are calculated within the group defined by the column heading: \n The first group of outcomes shown contains the Common Measures, including entered \nemployment rate, retention in the 2\nnd and 3rd quarters after exit, and average earnings in the \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit. \n The second group of outcomes contains the other WIA performance measures and \ncomparable 12-month outcomes. These have been calculated following the official \ndefinitions. See Appendix B for summary definitions. \n The third group of outcomes includes information about the job held in the quarter after \nexit. This information is reported for all individuals employed in the quarter after exit, \nwhether or not they were employed at participation. \n Other outcome information includes detail on some of the data used in the computation of \nthe common and WIA performance measures. \nMost numbers shown are the percentages within the column heading. Exceptions include the \nnumber of exiters, earnings change, and average earnings. \nThe distributions of earnings in the quarter after exit and earnings in the 3rd quarter after exit \ninclude only individuals with earnings in the quarter. Thus, the percentages shown sum to 100%. \nIn calculating percentages and averages, individua ls with missing data on either the row or \ncolumn heading are excluded. Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 274Table II-25 \nto II-26 These tables show trends over time in the out comes of WIA exiters for both the state and the \nnation. \nData for exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 are complete except for the data on outcomes in \nthe 4th quarter after exit. Data on outcomes in the 4th quarter after exit are for exiters from April \n2008 to December 2008. \nData for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009 do not include data on outcomes for the \n4th quarter after exit. Data on outcomes in the 2nd quarter after exit are for exiters from October \n2008 to June 2009 . Data on outcomes in the 3rd quarter after exit are for exiters from October \n2008 to March 2009 . \nData for earlier periods are complete. \nSee the notes to Tables II-25 to II-36 for additional information. \nSee the notes to Tables I-4 to I-7 for a discussion of trends over time in the number of exiters. \nThese trends can have impacts on the trends in ou tcomes. In particular, the large increase in the \nnumber of exiters from New York in PY 2006 may have affected the entered employment rate \nand the employment and credential rate because these outcomes were lower than average in New \nYork (and lower than previous years in New York). \nTable II-25 shows the calculated outcomes, while Table II-26 shows the number of exiters \nattaining positive outcomes. The calculated outcomes in Table II-25 generally cannot be \ncomputed from the data in Table II-26 due to exclusions from outcome measurement. \nTable II-37 This table shows the WIA performance measures calculated within detailed groups based on the characteristics of exiters from two different cohor ts of exiters. The entered employment rate and \ncredential rate performance measures are given for exiters from October 2008 to September \n2009, whereas the employment rete ntion and earnings change performance measures are given \nfor exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. Using two cohorts ensures that each performance \nmeasure is calculated for the most recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe column titled “Number of Exiters” contains the number of exiters in the group defined by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe group of exiters defined by the row heading. All of the performance measures, except \nearnings change, are percentages. \nOutcomes for characteristics listed under “Charact eristics of Exiters who Received Intensive or \nTraining Services” includ e only individuals who received intens ive or training services because \ninformation on the row heading is not collected for individuals who receive only core services. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the performance measures. \nTable II-38 This table shows the WIA performance measures calculated within detailed groups based on the \nservices received by exiters from two different c ohorts of exiters. The entered employment rate \nand credential rate performance measures are given for exiters from October 2008 to September \n2009, whereas the employment rete ntion and earnings change performance measures are given \nfor exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. Using two cohorts ensures that each performance \nmeasure is calculated for the most recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe column titled “Number of Exiters” contains the number of exiters in the group defined by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe group of exiters defined by the row heading. All of the performance measures, except \nearnings change, are percentages. \nSee the Appendix B for summary definitions of the performance measures. Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 275Table II-39 This table shows the WIA performance measures calculated within each st ate for exiters from \ntwo different cohorts of exiters. The entered employment rate and credential rate performance \nmeasures are given for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009, whereas the employment \nretention and earnings change performance measures are given for exiters from April 2008 to \nMarch 2009. Using two cohorts ensures that each performance measure is calculated for the \nmost recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” contain the number of exiters in the state identified by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe state. All of the performa nce measures, except earnings ch ange, are percentages. These \nperformance measures are calculated using WIASRD data and may differ, sometimes \nsubstantially, from the performance reported by the state in its PY 2009 Annual Report. \nSee Appendix B for the summary definitions of the performance measures. \nPart III: Dislocated Worker Exiters \n Tables in Part III contain information on all dislocated worker exiters, including exiters from \nlocal and statewide programs and National Emerge ncy Grant (NEG) projects, except that Table \nIII-41 excludes exiters served only by NEG projects. \nIndividuals served only by rapid response are excluded from WIASRD reporting and are not \nincluded in the tables. However, individuals served by rapid response—additional assistance \nfunds are included. \nTable III-1 \nto III-40 These tables contain data on dislocated workers. \nThere was a large increase in exiters from NEG projects from PY 2004 to PY 2005 and a \ndecrease in subsequent years. Most of these ch anges over time are due to a single NEG project \nin Texas (TX11), which increased from zero in PY 2004 to 65,209 in PY 2005 and then dropped \nto 20,936 in PY 2006 and 2,066 in PY 2007. Some of the data for this NEG project are very \ndifferent than the data for other dislocated workers, either in formula programs or NEG projects. Thus, the data are strongly affected by TX11. \nTable III-1 \nto \nTable III-15 These tables show the characteristics of exiters. Most numbers shown are the percentages within \nthe column heading. Exceptions include the num ber of exiters shown in the first three rows, \nwhich are counts, and preprogram earnings and average highest grade completed, for which both averages and percentages w ithin categories are shown. \nIn calculating percentages, individuals with missing data on either the row or column heading are \nexcluded. Values of zero are excluded when cal culating average preprogram quarterly earnings. \nSome characteristics, those shown under “Charact eristics of Exiters who Received Intensive or \nTraining Services,” are available only for individuals who received in tensive or training services. \nPercentages for these characteristics are calculated within this smaller universe, again excluding \nmissing data. \nSee the notes for Tables I-4 to I-7 for a discussion of trends over time in the number of exiters. \nTable III-1 \nto Table III-2 These tables show trends over time in the ch aracteristics of exiters fo r both the state and the \nnation. \nTable III-1 shows some substantial changes in ex iter characteristics among columns. Most of \nthese changes occur because of a sing le NEG program in Texas (TX11). \nTable III-2 shows counts of exite rs with particular characteristic s. These counts exclude missing \ndata and cannot be used to compute the percentages in Table III-1. Also, the counts for the \ncharacteristics under the heading “Characteristics of Exiters who Received Training or Intensive \nServices” do not include indivi duals who received only core services and, thus, are an \nunderestimate of the total number of persons with the characteristic who were served by WIA. Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 276Table III-9 \nto Table III-11 These tables are based only on individuals who received intensive or training services because \nthis is the universe for which the column headings are available. Some of these tables include a \ncolumn labeled “With Intensive or Training Servi ces,” which represents all individuals for whom \ndata on the column headings is collected and is the appropriate comparison for the other columns \n(rather than the data in other tables for all exiters). \nTable III-12 This table shows the characteristics of individu als by major service categories. The column \nheadings “Core Services Only,” “Core and In tensive Services Only,” and “Training” are \nmutually exclusive and exhaustive. An individual is included in one and only one of these \ncolumns. \nTable III-13 This table shows the number of individuals w ith specified characteristics by major service \ncategories. Missing data are excluded from thes e counts. Therefore, they cannot be used to \ncalculate the percentages shown in Table I II-11, which exclude missing data from the \ndenominator of percentages. \nThe number of exiters shown fo r characteristics that are available only for individuals who \nreceived intensive or training services is a subs tantial undercount of the total number with these \ncharacteristics because individuals who receiv e only core services are not counted. \nThe columns “Core Services Only,” “Core and In tensive Services Only,” and “Training” are \nmutually exclusive and exhaustive—a person is incl uded in one and only one of these columns. \nTable III-15 \nto Table III-26 These tables show the services received by ex iters. Most numbers shown are the percentages \nwithin the column heading. Exceptions include the number of exiters, which is a count, and \nweeks participated, for which bo th the average and percentages within categories are shown. \nIn calculating percentages, individuals with missing data on either the row or column heading are \nexcluded. \nThe row headings “Core services only,” “Intensive & core se rvices only,” and “Training \nservices” are mutually exclusive and exhaustive. An individual is included in one and only one \nof these rows. \nThe percentages shown for the six types of trai ning—on-the-job, skill upgrading & retraining, \nentrepreneurial training, ABE or ESL in combin ation with training, cu stomized training, and \nother occupational skills training—are calculated among those who received training. There is \nno clear distinction between skill upgrading & retr aining and other occupational skills training. \nTable III-15 \nto Table III-16 These tables show trends over time in the servi ces received by exiters for both the state and the \nnation. \nBeginning with the PY 2005 WIASRD reporting of coenrollment in Wagner-Peyser and TAA \nwas required. This change in reporting explains most of the increase in coenrollment in partner \nprograms, Wagner-Peyser, and TAA. \nTable III-15 shows some substantial changes in services among the columns. Most of these \nchanges occur because of a single NEG program in Te xas (TX11). See notes to Tables I-4 to I-7. \nTable III-23 \nto Table III-25 These tables are based only on individuals who received intensive or training services because \nthis is the universe for which the column headings are available. These tables include a column \nlabeled “With Intensive or Training Services,” wh ich represents all individuals for whom data on \nthe column headings is collected and is the appropriate comparison for the other columns (rather than the data in other tables for all exiters). \nBecause these tables show servi ces for a universe that is lim ited to individuals who receive \nintensive or training services, they should be inte rpreted with caution. For example, Table III-24 \nindicates the percentage of UI Claimants individuals receive tr aining. However, because UI \nClaimants who receive only core services are ex cluded, the true percentage receiving training \nmay be considerably less. Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 277Table III-26 This table shows services provided by state. Th e column for number of exiters shows the count \nof exiters in the state. The remaining columns sh ow the percentage within the state that received \nthe service identified by the column heading. These values can be compared with the national \nvalues in the first row. Thus, unlike most other tables, this table presents row percentages, not \ncolumn percentages. \nThe distribution among the service categories within a state may be strongly affected by policies \nand practices regarding paymen t for services by WIA and Wagner-Peyser and coenrollment \nbetween the two programs. For example, Nebr aska shows that 81.3% of exiters received \ntraining, possibly because Wagner-Peyser funds were used for core and intensive services. \nConversely, 81.2% of exiters in New York recei ved only core services, possibly because of \nextensive coenrollment with Wagner-Peyser. \nTable III-27 \nto \nTable III-39 These tables calculate each outcome for the most recent year’s worth of exiters for whom the \noutcome data is available, with the exception of Table III-27 and Table III-28, which show \ntrends over time. \nIndividuals who were reported as institutionalized or deceased at exit, those who had medical \nconditions that precluded continued participation in WIA or entry into employment or continued \nparticipation in the program, those providing car e to a family member with a health/medical \ncondition that precludes entry into employment or continued participation in the program, \nreturning Reservists who choose not to continue WIA services, and individuals who did not \nprovide a valid Social Security number are exclud ed from the calculations. However, they are \nincluded in the number of exiters shown. \nAll outcomes are calculated within the group defined by the column heading: \n The first group of outcomes shown contains the Common Measures, including entered \nemployment rate, retention in the 2nd and 3rd quarters after exit, and average earnings in the \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit. \n The second group of outcomes contains the other WIA performance measures and \ncomparable 12-month outcomes. These have been calculated following the official \ndefinitions. See Appendix B for summary definitions. \n The third group of outcomes includes information about the job held in the quarter after \nexit. This information is reported for all individuals employed in the quarter after exit, \nwhether or not they were employed at participation. \n Other outcome information includes detail on some of the data used in the computation of \nthe common and WIA performance measures. \nMost numbers shown are the percentages within the column heading. Exceptions include the \nnumber of exiters, earnings change, and average earnings. \nThe distributions of earnings in the quarter after exit and earnings in the 3rd quarter after exit \ninclude only individuals with earnings in the quarter. Thus, the percentages shown sum to 100%. \nIn calculating percentages and averages, individua ls with missing data on either the row or \ncolumn heading are excluded. \nTable III-27 \nto Table III-28 These tables show trends over time in the out comes of WIA exiters for both the state and the \nnation. \nData for exiters from April 2008 to March 2009 are complete except for the data on outcomes in \nthe 4th quarter after exit. Data on outcomes in the 4th quarter after exit are for exiters from April \n2008 to December 2008. \nData for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009 do not include data on outcomes for the \n4th quarter after exit. Data on outcomes in the 2nd quarter after exit are for exiters from October \n2008 to June 2009 . Data on outcomes in the 3rd quarter after exit are for exiters from October \n2008 to March 2009 . Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 278Data for earlier periods are complete, except for a few states. \nSee the notes to Tables III-27 to III-39 for additional information. \nSee the notes to Tables I-4 to I-7 for a discussion of trends over time in the number of exiters. \nThese trends can have impacts on the trends in outcomes. \nTable III-27 shows the calculated outcomes, while Table III-28 shows the number of exiters \nattaining positive outcomes. The calculated outcomes in Table II-27 generally cannot be \ncomputed from the data in Table II-28 due to exclusions from outcome measurement. \nTable III-40 This table shows the WIA performance measures calculated within detailed groups based in the \ncharacteristics of exiters from two different cohor ts of exiters. The entered employment rate and \ncredential rate performance measures are given for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009, \nwhereas the employment retention and earnings change performance measures are given for \nexiters from April 2008 to March 2009. Using two cohorts ensures that each performance \nmeasure is calculated for the most recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe column titled “Number of Exiters” contains the number of exiters in the group defined by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe group of exiters defined by the row heading. All of the performance measures, except \nearnings change, are percentages. \nOutcomes for characteristics listed under “Charact eristics of Exiters who Received Intensive or \nTraining Services” includ e only individuals who received intens ive or training services because \ninformation on the row heading is not collected for individuals who receive only core services. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the performance measures. \nTable III-41 This table shows the WIA performance measures calculated within detailed groups based on \nservices received by exiters from two different c ohorts of exiters. The entered employment rate \nand credential rate performance measures are given for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009, whereas the employment rete ntion and earnings change performance measures are given for \nexiters from April 2008 to March 2009. Using two cohorts ensures that each performance \nmeasure is calculated for the most recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe column titled “Number of Exiters” contains the number of exiters in the group defined by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe group of exiters defined by the row heading. All of the performance measures, except earnings change, are percentages. \nSee the Appendix B for the calcula tions of the performance measures. \nTable III-42 This table shows the WIA performance measures calculated within each st ate for exiters from \ntwo different cohorts of exiters. The entered employment rate and credential rate performance \nmeasures are given for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009, whereas the employment \nretention and earnings change performance measures are given for exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. Using two cohorts ensures that each performance measure is calculated for the \nmost recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nUnlike the other outcome tables, exiters who r eceived services only from NEG projects are \nexcluded from the calculations of the performance measures and the exiter counts in this table \nbecause they are excluded from the st ates’ official performance calculations. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” contain the number of exiters in the state identified by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe state. All of the performance measures ar e percentage. These performance measures are \ncalculated using WIASRD data and may differ, sometimes substantially, from the performance reported by the state in its PY 2009 Annual Report. \nSee Appendix B for the calculations of the performance measures. Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 279Part IV: Youth Exiters \n Tables in Part IV include all exiters from youth programs, including both local and statewide \nprograms. \nTable IV-1 \nto Table IV-12 These tables show the characteristics of exiters for both older and younger youth. Most numbers \nshown are the percentages within the column heading. Exceptions include the number of exiters \nshown in the first three rows, which are counts, and preprogram earnings and average highest \ngrade completed, for which both averages and percentages within categories are shown. \nIn calculating percentages, individuals with missing data on either the row or column heading are \nexcluded. Values of zero are excluded wh en calculating average preprogram earnings. \nVeteran and preprogram quarterly earnings are av ailable only for older youth, those at least age \n19 at participation. \nTable IV-1 \nto Table IV-2 These tables show trends over time in the ch aracteristics of exiters fo r both the state and the \nnation. \nTable IV-2 shows counts of exiters with particul ar characteristics. These counts exclude missing \ndata and cannot be used to compute the percentages in Table II-1. \nTable IV-12 This table shows the characteristics of youth wh o received specific youth activities. Youth who \nare not reported as receiving any of the you th activities are excluded from the table. \nTable IV-13 \nto Table IV-23 These tables show the services received by ex iters. Most numbers shown are the percentages \nwithin the column heading. Exceptions include the number of exiters shown in the first row, \nwhich is a count, and weeks participated, for which both the average and percentages within \ncategories are shown. \nThe percentages for the youth activities are based on youth reported as receiving at least one of \nthe activities. \nIn calculating percentages, individuals with missing data on either the row or column heading are \nexcluded. \nTable IV-13 \nto \nTable IV-14 These tables show trends over time in the servi ces received by exiters for both the state and the \nnation. \nBeginning with the PY 2005 WIASRD reporting of coenrollment in Wagner-Peyser and TAA \nwas required. This change in reporting explains most of the increase in coenrollment in partner \nprograms, Wagner-Peyser, and TAA. \nTable IV-24 This table shows youth activities provided by state. The column for number of exiters shows the \ncount of exiters in the state. The remaining columns show the percentage within the state that \nreceived the youth activity identif ied by the column heading. These percentages are based on \nyouth reported as receiving at least one of the youth activities. These values can be compared \nwith the national values in the first row. Thus , unlike most other tables, this table presents row \npercentages, not column percentages. \nTable IV-25 \nto Table IV-36 These tables show outcomes attained by youth exiters. Except in Tables IV-23 and 24, data for \nyouth retention are for exiters from April 2008 to March 2009, data for diploma attainment and skill attainment are for exiters from April 2009 to March 2010, data for placement are for exiters \nfrom October 2008 to September 2009, data for attending secondary school at exit are for exiters \nfrom April 2008 to March 2009 , and data for literacy and numeracy gains are based on \nparticipation years that began between July 2007and June 2008. \nIndividuals who were reported as institutionalized or deceased at exit, those who had medical \nconditions that precluded continued participation in WIA or entry into employment or continued \nparticipation in the program, those providing car e to a family member with a health/medical \ncondition that precludes entry into employment or continued participation in the program, \nreturning Reservists who choose not to continue WIA services, and individuals who did not provide a valid Social Security number are exclud ed from the calculations. However, they are Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 280included in the number of exiters shown. \nAll outcomes are calculated within the group defined by the column heading. \n The first group of outcomes shown contains the youth common measures. \n The second group contains additional outcomes for all youth. These include detail on some \nof the data used in the computation of the common measures and additional outcomes. \n The third group includes the older youth WIA performance measures. \n The fourth group contains the younger youth WIA performance measures. The skill \nattainment rate differs substantially from the of ficial definition because it is based only on \nexiters and includes all goals set for the youth during the youth’s period of participation. It \nis calculated as the total number of goals attained by the youth divided by the total number of goals set for the youth, excluding goals pending at exit for youth reported as \ninstitutionalized or deceased at exit and thos e who had medical conditions that precluded \ncontinued participation in WIA or entry into employment. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the outcomes. \nMost numbers shown are the percentages within the column heading. Exceptions include the \nnumber of exiters. The skill attainment rate is based on all goals set for youth identified by the column head. \nTable IV-25 \nto \nTable IV-26 These tables show trends over time in the out comes of WIA exiters for both the state and the \nnation. \nData for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009 are complete except for data on retention. \nData on retention are for exiters from October 2008 to March 2009 . \nData for exiters from April 2009 to March 2010 do not include data on retention. Data on \nplacement is for exiters from April 2009 to September 2009 . \nData for literacy and numeracy gains below the heading “PY 2008” are based on participation \nyears that began between July 2007 and June 2008; those below the heading “PY 2007” are based on participation years that began between July 2006 and June 2007. \nTable IV-25 shows the calculated outcomes, while Table IV-26 shows the number of exiters \nattaining positive outcomes. The calculated outcomes in Table II-25 generally cannot be computed from the data in Table IV-26 due to exclusions from outcome measurement. \nTables \nIV-37 to \nIV-39 These tables show outcomes on the youth common measures: placement in employment or \neducation, attainment of a degree or cer tificate, and literacy and numeracy gains. \nPlacement in employment or education is based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009 \nwho were not in post-secondary education or employment at the date of participation. \nAttainment of a degree or certificate is based on exiters from October 2008 to September 2009 \nwho were enrolled in education at the date of participation or at any point during the program. \nLiteracy and numeracy gains is based on the definition for the third year of implementation and \nincludes basic skills deficient out-of-school youth who began participation between July 2005 \nand June 2008. \nTable IV-37 This table shows the youth common measures cal culated within detailed groups based on the \ncharacteristics two different cohorts of youth. Placement in employment or education and \nattainment of a degree or certificate are given for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009, \nwhereas literacy and numeracy gains is based on youth who began participation between July \n2005 and June 2008. However, youth who began participation in PY 2005 must have completed \nthree years of participation to be included in PY 2008 literacy and numeracy and those who \nbegan in PY 2006 must have completed two years. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” or “Number of Youth” contain the number of youth in Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 281the group defined by the row heading. The remaining columns show the three common \ncalculated within the group of youth defined by the row heading. All of the common measures are percentages. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the common measures. \nTable IV-38 This table shows the youth common measures cal culated within detailed groups based on the \nservices received by two different cohorts of youth. Placement in employment or education and \nattainment of a degree or certificate are given for exiters from October 2007 to September 2008, \nwhereas literacy and numeracy gains is based on youth who began participation between July \n2005 and June 2008. However, youth who began participation in PY 2005 must have completed three years of participation to be included in PY 2008 literacy and numeracy and those who \nbegan in PY 2006 must have completed two years. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” or “Number of Youth” contain the number of youth in \nthe group defined by the row heading. The remaining columns show the three common \ncalculated within the group of youth defined by the row heading. All of the common measures are percentages. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the common measures. \nTable IV-39 This table shows the youth common measures calculated within each state. Placement in \nemployment or education and attainment of a degree or certificate are given for exiters from October 2007 to September 2008, whereas literacy and numeracy gains is based on youth who \nbegan participation between July 2005 and June 2008. However, youth who began participation \nin PY 2005 must have completed three years of pa rticipation to be included in PY 2008 literacy \nand numeracy and those who began in PY 2006 must have completed two years. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” or “Number of Youth” contain the number of youth in \nthe group defined by the row heading. The remaining columns show the three common calculated within the group of youth defined by the row heading. All of the common measures \nare percentages. \nThese common measures are calculated usi ng WIASRD data and may differ, sometimes \nsubstantially, from the outcomes reported by the state in its PY 2007 Annual Report. In \nparticular, some states were in the second y ear of implementation for literacy and numeracy \ngains and reported that measure based on a differe nt calculation in the PY 2007 Annual Report. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the common measures. \nTable IV-40 This table shows the WIA younger youth performance measures calculated within detailed \ngroups based on the characteristics of exiters. Th e retention rate is based on exiters from April \n2008 to March 2009; diploma attainment and skill attainment are based on exiters from April \n2009 to March 2010. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” contain the number of exiters in the group defined by \nthe row heading, within the relevant time period shown by the column heading. The remaining \ncolumns show the three pe rformance measures calculated within the group of exiters defined by \nthe row heading, again for the time period shown by the column heading. All of the performance measures are percentages. However, the skill attain ment rate is a percentage of all goals set for \nexiters, rather than of exiters. This skill attainment rate is different from the official performance \nmeasure. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the performance measures and the notes to Tables \nIV-23 to IV-32 for more detail. \nTable IV-41 This table shows the younger youth WIA performance measures calculated within detailed \ngroups based on the services received by exiters. See the notes to Table IV-33 and Tables IV-23 \nto IV-32 for more detail on the calculations and Appendix B for summary definitions of the \nperformance measures. Appendix A: Notes to Tables \nSocial Policy Research Associates 282Table IV-42 This table shows the younger youth WIA performance measures for younger youth calculated \nwithin states. See the notes to Table IV-33 an d Tables IV-23 to IV-32 for more detail on the \ncalculations and Appendix B for summary definitions of the performance measures. The skill \nattainment rate differs from th e official performance measure. \nBecause these performance measures are calcu lated from WIASRD data, the numbers shown \nmay differ, sometimes substantially, from the performance reported by the states in their PY \n2008 Annual Reports. \nTable IV-43 This table shows the older youth WIA performa nce measures calculated within detailed groups \nbased on the characteristics of exiters from two different cohorts of exiters. The entered employment rate and credential rate performance measures are given for exiters from October \n2007 to September 2008, whereas the employment retention and earnings change performance \nmeasures are given for exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. Using two cohorts ensures that \neach performance measure is calculated for the most recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” contain the number of exiters in the group defined by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe group of exiters defined by the row heading. All of the performance measures, except \nearnings change, are percentages. \nSee Appendix B for summary definitions of the performance measures. \nTable IV-44 This table shows the older youth WIA performa nce measures calculated within detailed groups \nbased on the services received by exiters from two different cohorts of exiters. The entered \nemployment rate and credential rate performance measures are given for exiters from October 2007 to September 2008, whereas the employment retention and earnings change performance \nmeasures are given for exiters from April 2007 to March 2008. Using two cohorts ensures that \neach performance measure is calculated for the most recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” contain the number of exiters in the group defined by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe group of exiters defined by the row heading. All of the performance measures, except earnings change, are percentages. \nSee the Appendix B for summary definitions of the performance measures \nTable IV-45 This table shows the WIA older youth performan ce measures calculated within each state for \nexiters from two different cohorts of exiters. The entered employment rate and credential rate \nperformance measures are given for exiters from October 2008 to September 2009, whereas the \nemployment retention and earnings change performance measures are given for exiters from April 2008 to March 2009. Us ing two cohorts ensures that each performance measure is \ncalculated for the most recent year’s worth of exiters available. \nThe columns titled “Number of Exiters” contain the number of exiters in the state identified by \nthe row heading. The remaining columns show the four performa nce measures calculated within \nthe state. All of the performa nce measures, except earnings ch ange, are percentages. These \nperformance measures are calculated using WIASRD data and may differ, sometimes \nsubstantially, from the performance reported by the state in its PY 2009 Annual Report. \nSee Appendix B for the calculations of the performance measures. \n \nSocial Policy Research Associates 283 \n \nAppendix B \nDefinitions Appendix B: Definitions \n Social Policy Research Associates 285Definitions of Characteristics \nAge categories Age is calculated as the difference in days between the birth \ndate and the participation date, divided by 365.25. \nIndividual with a disability An individual who indicates that he/she has any \"disability,\" as \ndefined in Section 3(2)(a) of the Americans with Disabilities \nAct of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102). Under that definition, a \"disability\" is a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the person's major life activities. (For definitions and examples of \"physical or mental impairment\" and \"major life activities,\" see paragraphs (1) and (2) of the \ndefinition of the term \"disability\" in 29 CFR 37.4, the definition \nsection of the WIA non-discrimination regulations.) \nRace and ethnicity \nHispanic A person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central \nAmerican, or other Spanish culture in origin, regardless of race \nNot Hispanic \n American Indian or \n Alaskan Native (only) A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North \nAmerica and South America (including Central America), and who maintains cultural identificati on through tribal affiliation or \ncommunity recognition. \n Asian (only) A person having origins in any of the original people of the Far \nEast, Southeast Asia, or the Indian Subcontinent (e.g., India, \nPakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Sikkim, and Bhutan). \nThis area includes, for exampl e, Cambodia, China, Japan, \nKorea, Malaysia, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. \n Black or African American (only) A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of \nAfrica. \nHawaiian or other Pacific Islander (only) A person having origins in any of the original people of Hawaii, \nGuam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. \n White (only) A person having origins in any of the original peoples of \nEurope, the Middle East, or North Africa. \n More than one race A person was reported as being in more than one of the above \nnon-Hispanic race categories. \nVeteran A person who served in the active U.S. military, naval, or air \nservice and who was discharged or released from such service under conditions other than dishonorable. \nDisabled veteran A veteran who served in the active U.S. military, naval, or air \nservice and who is entitled to compensation regardless of rating (including those rated at 0%); or who but for the receipt of \nmilitary retirement pay would be entitled to compensation, \nunder laws administered by the De partment of Veterans Affairs \n(DVA); or was discharged or released from activity duty because of a service-connected disability. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 286Campaign veteran A veteran who served on active duty in the U.S. armed forces \nduring a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a \ncampaign badge or expeditionary medal has been authorized as \nidentified and listed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). \nRecently separated veteran A veteran who a pplied for participation under Title I of WIA \nwithin 48 months after discharge or release from active U.S. military, naval, or air service. \nOther eligible person A person who is \n(a) the spouse of any person who died on active duty or of a \nservice-connected disability, \n(b) the spouse of any member of the Armed Forces serving \non active duty who at the time of application for assistance under this part, is listed, pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 101 and the regulations issued thereunder, by the Secretary concerned, in one or more of the following categories and has been so listed for more than 90 days: \n(i) missing in action; \n(ii) captured in the line of duty by a hostile force; or (iii) forcibly detained or interned in the line of duty by a \nforeign government or power; or \n(c) the spouse of any person who has a total disability \npermanent in nature resulting from a service-connected \ndisability or the spouse of a veteran who died while a disability so evaluated was in existence. \nEmployed at participation \nEmployed A person who either (a) did any work at all as a paid employee, \n(b) did any work at all in his or her own business, profession, or farm, (c) worked 15 hours or more as un unpaid worker in an enterprise operated by a member of the family, or (d) is one \nwho was not working, but has a job or business from which he \nor she was temporarily absent because of illness, bad weather, vacation, labor-management di spute, or personal reasons, \nwhether or not paid by the employer for time-off, and whether or not seeking another job. \nExcludes persons who, although employed, either (a) have \nreceived a notice of termination of employment or the employer has issued a Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) or other notice that the facility or enterprise will close, or (b) are transitioning service members. \nNot employed or received layoff notice An individual who does not meet the definition of employed \nabove. \nAverage preprogram quarterly earnings Quarterly earnings are derived by the state from UI wage \nrecords. If earnings in both the 2\nnd and 3rd quarters before \nparticipation are greater than zero, then the average of those two \nvalues. If only one is greater than zero, then that value. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 287Characteristics of Exiters who \nReceived intensive or training \nServices The following data is collected for youth and for adults and \ndislocated workers who received intensive or training services. \nLimited English-language \nproficiency A person who has limited ability in speaking, reading, writing \nor understanding the English language and (a) whose native \nlanguage is a language other than English, or (b) who lives in a family or community environment where a language other than English is the dominant language. \nSingle parent A single, separated, divorced, or widowed individual who has \nprimary responsibility for one or more dependent children under age 18. \nUI status \nClaimant Eligible Unemployment Compensation (U.C.) claimant. \nClaimant referred by WPRS Eligible claimant referred by the Worker Profiling and \nReemployment Services (WPRS) system. \nExhaustee The individual exhausted their U.C. benefits. \nLow income A registrant in one or more of the following categories: \n(A) receives, or is a member of a family which receives, cash \npayments under a Federal, state or income based public assistance program; \n(B) received an income, or is a member of a family that \nreceived a total family income, for the six month period prior to participation for the progra m involved (exclusive of \nunemployment compensation, child support payments, payments described in subp aragraph (A) and old age and \nsurvivors insurance benefits received under section 202 of the \nSocial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402)) that, in relation to family \nsize does not exceed the higher of: \n(i) the poverty line, for an equivalent period; or (ii) 70 percent of the lower living standard income level, for an \nequivalent period; \n(C) a member of a household that receives (or has been \ndetermined within the 6 month pe riod prior to participation for \nthe program involved to be eligible to receive) Food Stamps pursuant to the Food Stamp Act of l977 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.); \n(D) qualifies as a homeless individual, as defined in \nsubsections (a) and (c)of section 103 of the Stewart B. \nMcKinney Homeless Assistance Act(42 U.S.C. 11302); \n(E) is a foster child on behalf of whom state or local \ngovernment payments are made; \n(F) is a person with a disability whose own income meets the \nincome criteria established in WIA section 101(25)(A) or (B), \nbut is a member of a family whose income does not meet the \nestablished criteria. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 288Public assistance recipient A person who qualifies as a TANF recipient or other public \nassistance recipient, as defined below. \nTANF recipient A person who is listed on the welfare grant or has received cash \nassistance or other support services from the TANF agency in \nthe last six months prior to participation in the program. \nOther public assistance recipient A person who is receiving or has received cash assistance or \nother support services from one of the following sources in the \nlast six months prior to participation in the program: General Assistance (GA) (State/local government), Refugee Cash \nAssistance (RCA), Food Stamp Assistance, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI-SSA Title XVI). Do not include foster \nchild payments. \nBefore PY 2005, this field did not include Food Stamps. Some \nstates implemented the change to record receipt of Food Stamps and others did not. Therefore, the count of Food Stamps recipients is quite incomplete. \nOffender An individual (adult or youth) who either (a) is or has been \nsubject to any stage of the criminal justice process for committing a status offense or delinquent act, or (b) requires \nassistance in overcoming barriers to employment resulting from \na record of arrest or conviction for committing delinquent acts, such as crimes against persons, crimes against property, status offenses, or other crimes. \nHomeless or runaway youth An individual (adult or youth) who lacks a fixed, regular, \nadequate night time residence. This definition includes any individual who has a primary night time residence that is a \npublicly or privately operated shelter for temporary \naccommodation; an institution pr oviding temporary residence \nfor individuals intended to be institutionalized; or a public or private place not designated for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings; or a person under \n18 years of age who absents himself or herself from home or \nplace of legal residence without the permission of his or her family (i.e., runaway youth). This definition does not include an individual imprisoned or deta ined under an Act of Congress \nor State law. An individual who may be sleeping in a temporary accommodation while away from home should not, \nas a result of that alone, be recorded as homeless. \nHighest grade completed \n8th or less Highest grade completed of 8 or less. \nSome high school Highest grade completed between 9 and 11 or highest grade \ncompleted is 12 but the individual did not receive a high school diploma or GED. \nHigh school graduate The individual comple ted the 12th grade and attained a high \nschool diploma. Also includes individuals with a disability who receive a certificate of attendance/completion. \nNote: When used as column heading high school graduate also \nincludes high school equivalency \nHigh school equivalency Individuals with a GED or other high school equivalency. \nSome postsecondary Includes college or fu ll-time technical or vocational school. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 289College graduate 4-year Bachelor’s degree or equivalent or beyond. \nCharacteristics Available for \nDislocated Workers The following characteristics are available only for dislocated \nworkers \nDisplaced homemaker A person who has been providing unpaid services to family \nmembers in the home and has been dependent on the income of another family member but is no longer supported by that \nincome and is unemployed or underemployed and is \nexperiencing difficulty in obtaining or upgrading employment. \nTime of participation Based on the length of time between the dislocation date (the \nlast day of employment at the dislocation job) and the participation date. Individuals whose dislocation date is not \nreported are excluded from the calculation. \nCharacteristics Available for \nYouth The following characteristics are available only for youth. \nPregnant or parenting youth An individual who is under 22 years of age and who is \npregnant, or a youth (male or female) who is providing custodial care for one or more dependents under age 18. \nBasic literacy skills deficient A person who computes or solves problems, reads, writes, or \nspeaks English at or below the 8th grade level or is unable to \ncompute or solve problems, read, write, or speak English at a \nlevel necessary to function on the jo b, in the individual's family, \nor in society. In addition, states and grantees have the option of establishing their own definition, which must include the above language. In cases where states or grantees establish such a \ndefinition, that definition will be used for basic literacy skills \ndetermination. \nEver in foster care A person who is in foster care or has been in the foster care \nsystem. \nYouth who needs additional assistance A youth aged 14-21 who requires additional assistance to \ncomplete an educational pr ogram, or to secure and hold \nemployment as defined by state or local policy. If the State Board defines a policy, the policy must be included in the State Plan. \nSchool status at participation School status has been adjusted to be consistent with highest \ngrade completed. \nAttending school \nHigh school or below The individual has not received a secondary school diploma or \nits recognized equivalent and is attending any secondary school \n(including elementary, intermediate, junior high school, \nwhether full or part-time), or is between school terms and \nintends to return to school. \nIncludes attending alternative school when used as a column \nheading. \nAlternative school The individual has not received a secondary school diploma or \nits recognized equivalent and is attending an alternative high \nschool or an alternative course of study approved by the local \neducational agency whether full or part-time. \n Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 290Postsecondary The individual has received a secondary school diploma or its \nrecognized equivalent and is attending a post-secondary school \nor program (whether full or part-time), or is between school \nterms and intends to return to school. . \nHigh school dropout The individual is no longer attending any school and has not \nreceived a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent \nHigh school graduate/equivalent The individual is not attending any school and has either \ngraduated from high school or holds a GED. \n Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 291Definitions of Services \nServices for Adults, Dislocated Workers, and Youth \nCoenrollment \nWIA adult WIA Title 1B local or statewide adult programs. \nWIA dislocated worker WIA Title 1B local or statewide dislocated worker programs or \nNational Emergency Grants. \nWIA youth WIA Title 1B local or statewide youth programs \nPartner program Any partner program. Note: reporting of partner programs is \noptional and may be seriously under counted. \nWagner-Peyser The participant received services financially assisted under the \nWagner-Peyser Act (29 USC 49 et seq.) WIA section 121 \n(b)(1)(B)(ii). \nTAA The participant received services financially assisted under the \nTrade Adjustment Act (WIA section 121(b)(1)(B)(viii)). \nNational Farmworker Jobs Program The participant received services financially assisted under \nWIA Title I-D, Section 167 \nVeterans programs The participant received services financially assisted by \nDVOP/LVER funds (WIA section 121(b)(1)(B)(ix)) or training services financially assisted under WIA section 168. \nVocational Education The participant recei ved services financially assisted under the \nCarl D. Perkins Vocational a nd Applied Technology Education \nAct (20 USC 2471) (WIA section 121(b)(1)(B)(vii)) \nAdult Education The participant recei ved services financially assisted under \nWIA Title II. \nTitle V Older Worker The participant recei ved services financially assisted under the \nOlder Americans Act of 1998 (WIA section 121(b)(1)(B)(vi) \nOther partner programs \n Job Corps, Indian and Native American Programs, Vocational \nRehabilitation, YouthBuild, and other WIA and non-WIA \npartner programs. \nWeeks participated Weeks between participation and the last service (exit). \nServices for Adults and Dislocated Workers \nServices Received \nRapid response The individual participated in rapid response activities \nauthorized at WIA section 134(a)(2)(A)(i) at any time prior to \nor subsequent to participation in the program. Does not include rapid response, additional assistance (WIA section 134(a)(2)(A)(ii)). Individuals who receive only rapid response are not included in the file. \nDisaster relief The individual received disaster relief assistance as part of a \nNational Emergency Grant (NEG), which includes, but is not limited to, providing food, clothing, shelter and related \nhumanitarian services; performing demolition, cleaning, repair, \nrenovation and reconstruction of damaged and destroyed public \nstructures, facilities and lands located within the designated disaster area, as defined in the grant award document. \nCore self-service an \ninformational activities The individual received core self-service and informational \nactivities. Self-service and informational activities are those core services accessible to the general public electronically or \nthrough a physical location that are designed to inform and Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 292educate individuals about the labor market and their \nemployment strengths, weaknesses, and the range of services \nappropriate to their situation, and that do not require significant \nstaff involvement with the individual. \nStaff-assisted core services Staff-assisted core services, excluding self-service and \ninformational activities. Core services include (but are not limited to): \n Staff-assisted job search and placement assistance, including \ncareer counseling; \n Follow-up services, including counseling regarding the \nworkplace; \n Staff-assisted job referrals (s uch as testing and background \nchecks); \n Staff-assisted job development (working with employer and \njobseeker); and \n Staff-assisted workshop s and job clubs. \nWorkforce information The individual recei ved workforce information services which \nincludes, but is not limited to, providing information on state and local labor market conditions ; industries, occupations and \ncharacteristics of the workfor ce; area business identified skills \nneeds; employer wage and benef it trends; short- and long-term \nindustry and occupational proj ections; worker supply and \ndemand; and job vacancies survey results. Workforce information also includes local employment dynamics \ninformation such as workfor ce availability; business turnover \nrates; job creation; job destruction; new hire rates, worker residency, commuting pattern information; and the identification of high growth and high demand industries. \nIntensive Services Intensive services may include: \n Comprehensive and specialized assessments of skill levels and \nservice needs including: \n diagnostic testing and use of other assessment tools; and \n in-depth interviewing and evaluation to identify \nemployment barriers and appropriate employment goals; \n Development of an individual employment plan, to identify the \nemployment goals, appropriate achievement objectives, and \nappropriate combination of serv ices for the participant to \nachieve the employment goals; \n Group counseling; \n Individual counseling and career planning; \n Case management for participants seeking training services; \n Short-term prevocational services, including development of \nlearning skills, communication skills, interviewing skills, punctuality, personal maintenance skills, and professional \nconduct, to prepare individuals fo r unsubsidized employment or \ntraining; \n Out-of-area job search assistance; \n Relocation assistance; \n Internships; and \n Work experience. \nIntensive services beyond those listed in the Act may also be \nprovided. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 293Prevocational activities The individual recei ved short-term prevocational services, \nincluding development of learning skills, communication skills, \ninterviewing skills, punctuality, personal maintenance skills, \nand professional conduct, to prepare individuals for unsubsidized employment or training (i.e., intensive services for adults and dislocated workers). \nTraining Services \nOn-the-job training Training by an employer that is provided to a paid participant \nwhile engaged in productive work in a job that: \n(A) provides knowledge or skills essential to the full and adequate \nperformance of the job; \n(B) provides reimbursement to the employer of up to 50 percent of \nthe wage rate of the participant, for the extraordinary costs of \nproviding the training and additional supervision related to the \ntraining; and \n(C) is limited to the period of time required for a participant to \nbecome proficient in the occupation for which the training is being \nprovided. In determining the appropriate length of the contract, consideration should be given to the skill requirements of the \noccupation, the academic and o ccupational skill level of the \nparticipant, prior work experience, and the participant's individual employment plan. \nSkill upgrading & retraining \nEntrepreneurial training \nABE or ESL in combination \nwith training \nCustomized training \nOther occupational skills \ntraining Includes the receipt of the following types of services: \n Occupational skills training, incl uding training for nontraditional \nemployment; \n Programs that combine workpl ace training with related \ninstruction, which may include cooperative education programs; \nTraining programs operated by the private sector; \nNeeds-related payments The individual received needs rela ted payments WIA title IB \nfunded for the purpose of enabling the individual to participate \nin approved training funded under WIA Title IB. \nOther supportive services The individual received supportive services (WIA section \n134(e)(2)) which include, but are not limited to, assistance with transportation, child care, dependent care, and housing that are necessary to enable the individua l to participate in activities \nauthorized under WIA title IB. For youth, support services \n(WIA section 101(46)) for youth include (a) linkages to \ncommunity services; (b) assistance with transportation; (c) assistance with child care and dependent care; (d) assistance with housing; (e) referrals to medical services; and (f) assistance with uniforms or other appropriate work attire and \nwork-related tools, including such items as eye glasses and \nprotective eye gear. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 294Service category \nCore services only Individuals that received core services other than information or \nself-service (and, thus were registered for WIA), but not intensive or training services. \nIntensive & core services only Individual who received core and intensive services, but not \ntraining. \nTraining services Includes individuals who received any of the following: \nPell Grant recipient An individual who is or has been notified s/he will be receiving \na Pell Grant at any time during participation in the program. This information may be updated at any time during \nparticipation in the program. \nITA established Any of the individual's services were purchased utilizing an \nIndividual Training Account established for adults or dislocated workers and funded by WIA title I. \nServices for Adults, Dislocated Workers, and Youth \nOccupation of training The 8 digit O*Net 4.0 (or later versions) code that best \ndescribes the training occupation for which the participant received training services. \nManagerial, prof., technical O*Net codes in the range from 11000000 to 29999999. \nService Occupations O*Net codes in the range from 31000000 to 39999999. \nSales and Clerical O*Net codes in the range from 41000000 to 43999999. \nFarming, fishing, forestry, \nconstruction, and extraction O*Net codes in the range from 45000000 to 47999999. \nInstallation, repair, production, \ntransportation, material moving O*Net codes in the range from 49000000 to 55999999. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 295Services for Youth \nEnrolled in Education The individual is enrolled in secondary school, post-secondary \nschool, adult education progra ms, or any other organized \nprogram of study. States may use this coding value if the youth \nwas either already enrolled in education at the time of \nparticipation in the program or became enrolled in education at any point while participating in the program. \nYouth Activities \nEducational achievement \nservices Educational achievement services include, but are not limited \nto, tutoring, study skills training, and instruction leading to secondary school completion, including dropout prevention strategies; and alternative secondary school offerings. \nEmployment services Employment services include paid and unpaid work \nexperiences, including internsh ips, and job shadowing; and \noccupational skills training. \nSummer youth employment opportunities Summer employment opportunities directly linked to academic \nand occupational learning. \nLeadership development \nactivities Leadership development opportunities include, but are not \nlimited to, opportunities that encourage responsibility, \nemployability, and other positive social behaviors such as (a) \nexposure to post-secondary educational opportunities; (b) community and service learning projects; (c) peer-centered activities, including peer mentoring and tutoring; (d) organizational and team work training, including team \nleadership training; (e) training in decision making, including \ndetermining priorities; and (f) citizenship training, including life skills training such as parenting, work behavior training, and budgeting of resources. \nAdditional support for youth services Supports for youth services that include, but are not limited to, \nthe following: (a) adult mentoring for a duration of at least twelve (12) months, that may occur both during and after \nprogram participation or (b) comprehensive guidance and \ncounseling, including drug and alcohol abuse counseling, as well as referrals to counseling, as appropriate to the needs of the \nindividual youth. \nReceived 12 months of follow-up services The participant received 12 months of follow-up services. \nFollow-up services for youth include (a) regular contact with a youth participant's employer, including assistance in addressing work-related problems that arise; (b) assistance in securing \nbetter paying jobs, career devel opment and further education; \n(c) work-related peer support gr oups; (d) adult mentoring; and \n(e) tracking the progress of youth in employment after training. \nResults in the tables include only youth who exited before July \n1, 2009 and, thus, could have received 12 months of follow-up \nwhen the WIASRD data were reported . \n Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 296Definitions of Outcomes \n All outcomes exclude indivi duals who were reported as \ninstitutionalized, having health/medical problems, or deceased \nat exit. \nOutcomes for Adults, Dislocated Workers and Older Youth \nCommon Measures Official definitions of the common measures are in TEGL 17-05 \nEntered employment (quarter after \nexit) Employed in the quarter after exit. Excludes individuals who \nwere employed at participation at participation unless they received a notice of layoff or plant closing. . \nRetention in 2nd and 3rd quarters \nafter exit (adults and dislocated workers) Employed in both the 2\nnd and 3rd quarters after exit among those \nemployed in the quarter after exit. \nAverage earnings in 2nd and 3rd \nquarters after exit (adults and \ndislocated workers) Average of earnings in the 2nd and 3rd quarters after exit among \nthose with earnings in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd quarters after exit. This \nmeasure becomes a common measure beginning with PY 2006. The corresponding common measure for PY 2005 was earnings change in the 2\nnd and 3rd quarters after exit (see below). \nOther WIA Performance and \n12-Month Outcomes Official definitions of the other WIA performance outcomes are \nincluded in TEGL 17-05, Attachment D. Definitions of the 12-month outcomes are in the reporting instructions for the WIA Annual Report. \nRetained employment 3rd quarter \nafter exit Employed in the 3rd quarter after exit among those who were \nemployed in the quarter after exit. For older youth, excludes \nthose who were not employed in the 3rd quarter after exit, but \nwere in postsecondary education or advanced training in the 3rd \nquarter after exit. \nRetained employment 4th quarter \nafter exit Employed in the 4th quarter after exit among those who were \nemployed in the quarter after exit. For older youth, excludes those who were not employed in the 4\nth quarter after exit, but \nwere in postsecondary education or advanced training in the 3rd \nquarter after exit. . \nEarnings change \n2nd and 3rd quarters after exit Earnings in the 2nd and 3rd quarters after exit minus earnings in \nthe 2nd and 3rd quarters before participation among those who \nwere employed in the quarter after exit. Excludes those whose employment in the 1\nst, 2nd or quarter after exit or the 3rd quarter \nafter exit was determined thr ough supplemental data and no \nearnings were found in wage records. For older youth, excludes \nthose who were not employed in the 3rd quarter after exit, but \nwere in postsecondary education or advanced training in the 3rd \nquarter after exit. \n3rd and 4th quarters after exit Earnings in the 4th and 5th quarters after exit minus earnings in \nthe 2nd and 3rd quarters before participation among those who \nwere employed in the quarter after exit. Excludes those whose \nemployment in the quarter after exit or the 3rd or 4th quarters \nafter exit was determined thr ough supplemental data and no \nearnings were found in wage records. For older youth, excludes those who were not employed in the 4\nth quarter after exit, but \nwere in postsecondary education or advanced training in the 3rd \nquarter after exit. \nEarnings replacement rate in the 2nd \nand 3rd quarters after exit (dislocated Earnings in the 2nd and 3rd quarters after exit divided by \nearnings in the 2nd and 3rd quarters before participation among Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 297workers) those who were employed in the quarter after exit. Earnings are \naggregated over all included ex iters before the division. \nExcludes those whose employment in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd quarters \nafter exit after exit was determined through supplemental data and no earnings were found in wage records \nCredential and employment rate \n(adults and dislocated workers) Employed in the quarter after exit and received credential among \nadults and dislocated workers who received training. See attained credential below for the types of credentials counted. \nCredential rate Employed or in postsec ondary education/advanced training in \nthe quarter after exit and received credential among adults and dislocated workers who received training. See attained \ncredential below for the types of credentials counted. \nInformation about Employment \nin Quarter after exit The following outcomes are determined for persons who are \nemployed in the quarter after exit. \nOccupation of employment The occupation of employment is determined in the same way \nas occupation of training (see above) except that CIP codes \ncannot be used. \nNontraditional employment Employment is in an occupation or field of work for which \nindividuals of the participant's gender comprise less than 25% of the individuals employed in such occupation or field of work. Non-traditional employment can be based on either local or national data, and both males and females can be in non-\ntraditional employment. This information can be based on any \njob held after exit and only applies to adults, dislocated workers, and older youth who entered employment in the quarter after the exit quarter. \nOther Outcome Information \nEmployment The individual is considered employed in a quarter after the exit \nquarter if wage records for that quarter show earnings greater than zero. When supplemental data sources are used, \nindividuals should be counted as employed if, in the calendar \nquarter of measurement after the exit quarter, they did any work at all as paid employees (i.e., received at least some earnings), worked in their own business, profession, or worked on their own farm. Quarter after exit \nThird quarter after exit Fifth quarter after exit Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 298Average earnings (among with \nearnings) The total earnings in the quarter as determined from wage \nrecords. Wage record information can be obtained from the \nstate, other states, other entities maintaining wage record \nsystems, or from WRIS. Earnings from all employers of the individual should be summed. \nWhat if the individual appears in several different wage record \nsystems (e.g., systems in two different states)? \nEarnings from these different s ources of wage records should be \nsummed for each quarter. \nIndividuals with no earnings in a quarter are excluded when \ncomputing average earnings for that quarter and are excluded from the distribution of earnings as well. \n \n \n \n Quarter after exit \nSecond quarter after exit \nThird quarter after exit Fourth quarter after exit \nEarnings quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 \n$2,500 to $4,999 \n$5,000 to $7,499 \n$7,500 to $9,999 $10,000 or more \nEarnings 3rd quarter after exit \n$1 to $2,499 $2,500 to $4,999 \n$5,000 to $7,499 \n$7,500 to $9,999 $10,000 or more \nAttained credential A nationally recognized degree or certificate or state/locally \nrecognized credential. Credentials include, but are not limited to, a high school diploma, GED, or other recognized equivalents, post-secondary degrees/certificates, recognized \nskill standards, and licensure or industry-recognized certificates. \nStates should include all state education agency recognized credentials. In addition, states should work with local workforce investment boards to encourage certificates to \nrecognize successful completion of the training services listed \nabove that are designed to equip individuals to enter or re-enter \nemployment, retain employmen t, or advance into better \nemployment. \nCredential must be obtained either during participation or by the \nend of the third quarter after exit from services (other than \nfollow up services). High school \ndiploma/equivalency \nAA, AS, BA, BS or other \ncollege degree \nOccupational skills \nlicense/credential/certificate \nOther \nIn postsecondary education or \nadvanced training The individual was enrolled in advanced training or post-\nsecondary education in the first (or third) quarter after exit \nincluding: \n Advanced training is an occupational skills employment/ \ntraining program, not funded under Title I of the WIA, which \ndoes not duplicate training received under Title I. It includes \nonly training outside of the One-Stop, WIA, and partner system (i.e., training following exit). \n \nTraining that leads to an academic degree (e.g., AA, AS, BA, BS) should be categorized as post-secondary education and not \nreported as advanced training. \n Post-secondary education is a program at an accredited degree-\ngranting institution that leads to an academic degree (e.g., A.A., \nA.S., B.A., and B.S.). Programs offered by degree-granting \ninstitutions that do not lead to an academic degree (e.g., \ncertificate programs) do not co unt as a placement in post-\nsecondary education, but may coun t as a placement in “advanced \ntraining/occupational skills training.” Quarter after exit \nThird quarter after exit Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 299Youth Common Measures \nPlacement in Employment or \nEducation3 Percentage of youth exiters in employment (including the \nmilitary) or enrolled in secondary education and/or advanced \ntraining/occupational skills training in the first quarter after the exit quarter, calculated among youth who were not in post-secondary education or employment at the date of participation.. \nAttainment of Degree or \nCertificate3 Percentage of exiters who attain a diploma, GED, or certificate \nby the end of the third quarter after the exit quarter, calculated among those enrolled in education at the date of participation or at any point during the program. \nLiteracy and Numeracy Gains Youth participants who increase one or more educational \nfunctioning levels, as a per centage of youth who have \ncompleted a first, second, or third year of participation in the program or exit before completing a first year, calculated among out-of-school youth who are basic skills deficient. \nOut-of-school youth are youth w ho were not attending school at \nthe date of participation an d youth attending postsecondary \nschool who are basic skills deficient. \nOutcomes for All Youth \nAttending secondary school at \nexit1 The youth exited WIA services but was still attending \nsecondary school at exit. \n Placement (quarter after exit)3 The percentage of youth entering any of the following activities \nwithin 1 quarter of exit. \nPostsecondary education A program at an accredited degree-granting institution that \nleads to an academic degree (e.g., A.A., A.S., B.A., B.S.). Programs offered by degree-granting institutions that do not lead to an academic degree (e.g., certificate programs) do not count as a placement in post-secondary education, but may \ncount as a placement in “advanced training/occupational skills \ntraining.” \nAdvanced training Advanced training is an occupational skills employment/ \ntraining program, not funded under Title I of the WIA, which does not duplicate training received under Title I. It includes only training outside of the One-Stop, WIA, and partner system (i.e., training following exit). \nTraining that leads to an academic degree (e.g., AA, AS, BA, \nBS) should be categorized as post-secondary education and not reported as advanced training. \nApprenticeships A program approved and recorded by the ETA Bureau of \nApprenticeship and Training or by a recognized state apprenticeship agency or council. Approval is by certified registration or other appropriate written credential. \nMilitary service The youth was on active duty any time during the 3rd quarter \nafter exit. Appendix B: Definitions \nSocial Policy Research Associates 300Employment The individual is considered employed in a quarter after the exit \nquarter if wage records for that quarter show earnings greater \nthan zero. When supplemental data sources are used, \nindividuals should be counted as employed if, in the calendar quarter of measurement after the exit quarter, they did any work at all as paid employees (i.e., received at least some earnings), worked in their own business, profession, or worked on their own farm. \nRetention (3rd quarter after \nexit) Percentage of youth in any of the following activities at any \ntime during the third quarter after exit. See placement above for \ndefinitions of the categories. \nPostsecondary education \nAdvanced training \nApprenticeships \nMilitary service \nEmployment \nYounger Youth WIA \nPerformance Outcomes \nYouth retention2 Percentage of youth in any of the following activities at any \ntime during the third quarter after exit: postsecondary \neducation, advanced training, apprenticeship, military service, \nor employment. Excludes youth who were attending secondary school at exit. \nDiploma attainment rate1 The youth attained a secondary (high school) diploma or \nequivalent during enrollment or by the end of the first quarter after exit. The term diploma m eans any credential that the state \neducation agency accepts as equivalent to a high school diploma. Youth still in secondary school at exit are excluded. \nSkill attainment rate1 The skill attainment rate differs substantially from the official \ndefinition (except in Table IV-42) because it is based only on \nexiters and includes all goals set for the youth during the \nyouth’s period of participation. It is calculated as the total number of goals attained by the youth divided by the total number of goals set for the youth, excluding goals pending at exit for youth reported as institutionalized or deceased at exit \nand those who had medical cond itions that precluded continued \nparticipation in WIA or entry into employment. \n \n \n " }

[ 0.003443849738687277, -0.009056425653398037, 0.04064161702990532, 0.03870086371898651, 0.018666528165340424, -0.003058376954868436, -0.032304659485816956, 0.07380874454975128, -0.1181780993938446, 0.02819110080599785, -0.01929212175309658, -0.02040012925863266, -0.02505362406373024, 0.007489803712815046, -0.0011001791572198272, 0.13409888744354248, 0.04398798197507858, -0.06393162906169891, -0.013297793455421925, -0.02572680450975895, 0.05146591737866402, 0.0758427232503891, 0.014794092625379562, -0.015027737244963646, -0.06211317703127861, 0.030994297936558723, -0.03638596087694168, 0.03297239542007446, 0.06625498831272125, 0.008496986702084541, 0.004994072485715151, 0.07830730825662613, 0.022044576704502106, -0.017242835834622383, 0.10626589506864548, 0.00023407588014379144, 0.026972193270921707, 0.023571018129587173, 0.031467728316783905, 0.02008446305990219, -0.03224301338195801, -0.03659259155392647, 0.0006595613667741418, -0.0358479879796505, -0.00578747782856226, -0.06174216791987419, 0.015772942453622818, 0.010535500943660736, 0.010566402226686478, -0.033271677792072296, 0.08049985766410828, 0.008529015816748142, -0.055564891546964645, -0.009784822352230549, -0.0024270350113511086, -0.0758202001452446, 0.003921845927834511, -0.02740359678864479, 0.018626321107149124, -0.005631717387586832, -0.0428888164460659, 0.02752753347158432, -0.012442870065569878, -0.001158915925770998, 0.04836007580161095, 0.05437904968857765, -0.08831217139959335, -0.050853971391916275, -0.03679254651069641, -0.14022858440876007, 0.06359688192605972, -0.06747661530971527, -0.10232064127922058, -0.08048705756664276, -0.023516690358519554, 0.0575772188603878, 0.00010835228022187948, 0.054926127195358276, 0.06887336075305939, -0.05004557594656944, 0.021799201145768166, 0.04527388513088226, 0.006881033536046743, -0.07023083418607712, -0.021848803386092186, 0.0332699753344059, -0.06081622466444969, 0.008648770861327648, 0.055221326649188995, 0.0007203323184512556, 0.03276757150888443, -0.12183962017297745, -0.04271005094051361, 0.03553791716694832, 0.015783565118908882, 0.020771902054548264, 0.02155090495944023, -0.05768908932805061, -0.0010737638222053647, -0.011967338621616364, -0.06124035641551018, -0.030263742431998253, -0.08698699623346329, -0.0613117553293705, -0.02858411706984043, 0.019348256289958954, 0.04487276449799538, 0.04379608854651451, 0.0378856286406517, 0.025424407795071602, 0.03249466046690941, -0.009587557055056095, -0.019661270081996918, -0.029545480385422707, 0.041056592017412186, -0.035564109683036804, -0.013281570747494698, -0.049671657383441925, -0.03890473023056984, -0.09732986986637115, 0.014479472301900387, 0.022770090028643608, 0.022700035944581032, -0.07103337347507477, 0.029402121901512146, -0.0911802351474762, 0.025771360844373703, 3.052968214016721e-33, 0.039023105055093765, -0.06036750599741936, -0.043121516704559326, 0.037774015218019485, 0.013401729054749012, 0.02973490208387375, 0.0072041889652609825, -0.03691388666629791, 0.0417826883494854, -0.016141681000590324, -0.06566217541694641, 0.08514399826526642, 0.015413192100822926, 0.017832962796092033, 0.001555367256514728, -0.07766927033662796, 0.021476661786437035, 0.03409417346119881, 0.055234428495168686, 0.05115082114934921, -0.010173615999519825, -0.09004908800125122, -0.03324500843882561, 0.03277236968278885, 0.03658202663064003, 0.0581975020468235, 0.03418906033039093, 0.055999577045440674, -0.0363108292222023, 0.029710758477449417, 0.048773061484098434, -0.00045274064177647233, -0.07108734548091888, -0.03406761586666107, 0.02285730093717575, 0.007635063491761684, -0.034079793840646744, 0.05200229585170746, -0.037503886967897415, -0.06254978477954865, -0.053471822291612625, 0.03694538399577141, -0.030018828809261322, -0.008334117941558361, 0.0348079614341259, 0.009859905578196049, 0.10046417266130447, 0.026708735153079033, -0.021800071001052856, 0.006231176201254129, 0.013288498856127262, 0.07745227217674255, 0.004102413076907396, 0.025996118783950806, -0.0016131572192534804, 0.019429881125688553, 0.04617379605770111, -0.07895193248987198, 0.09083351492881775, 0.028113801032304764, -0.0035947118885815144, 0.10470721125602722, -0.0898224338889122, -0.015697939321398735, 0.006390522699803114, 0.014560211449861526, 0.03306968882679939, 0.003472480457276106, 0.07917848974466324, 0.02407785877585411, 0.043470945209264755, -0.08687585592269897, 0.0473918691277504, 0.024007413536310196, 0.012710405513644218, -0.05961982160806656, 0.03993699699640274, 0.1045980229973793, -0.04036812111735344, 0.06379279494285583, -0.028050320222973824, 0.010937539860606194, 0.03263487666845322, -0.008677780628204346, -0.015521791763603687, -0.06615780293941498, 0.015246570110321045, -0.001339419512078166, -0.06974771618843079, -0.04855240136384964, 0.0053536552004516125, 0.01364188827574253, 0.010701196268200874, 0.061946719884872437, 0.04412318021059036, -3.230446922497762e-33, 0.052454035729169846, -0.00043538404861465096, 0.04164508730173111, -0.07449324429035187, -0.02163824811577797, -0.09081379324197769, 0.08472596108913422, -0.02586831897497177, 0.10762836784124374, 0.008114553987979889, -0.0361526757478714, -0.02291136048734188, -0.0384783037006855, 0.0685337707400322, 0.0063010323792696, 0.04368949681520462, -0.09008336812257767, 0.01920512318611145, -0.05086616799235344, 0.019458957016468048, -0.07874935120344162, 0.057123880833387375, -0.039316948503255844, 0.014321552589535713, -0.04990147799253464, 0.07025321573019028, -0.08787578344345093, -0.1366281807422638, 0.0002501829294487834, -0.03548536077141762, -0.13164548575878143, -0.008976832963526249, -0.07497730106115341, 0.009352538734674454, -0.08456975966691971, -0.03351545333862305, 0.08085819333791733, -0.05438908562064171, 0.010083242319524288, -0.01614239253103733, 0.08836902678012848, 0.06266114860773087, -0.021331004798412323, 0.007804065942764282, 0.0057305339723825455, 0.019894585013389587, 0.041774850338697433, 0.0068460991606116295, -0.03223281353712082, 0.021642284467816353, 0.08005225658416748, 0.10861265659332275, -0.03427507355809212, 0.03646606206893921, 0.040907930582761765, -0.06272188574075699, 0.1216157078742981, -0.04344248026609421, -0.07727275043725967, 0.026643376797437668, 0.08267907798290253, 0.08626798540353775, 0.016326388344168663, 0.03907489404082298, 0.010326565243303776, 0.0038301118183881044, 0.025485645979642868, -0.062410663813352585, 0.05222586542367935, -0.03903206065297127, -0.06027870625257492, -0.07714439183473587, 0.06138733774423599, 0.005689665675163269, 0.02185177430510521, -0.018991677090525627, 0.0006628709379583597, -0.053097665309906006, 0.006720568053424358, 0.05707072094082832, -0.0376800112426281, -0.006664234213531017, -0.009808827191591263, 0.08125948905944824, 0.05677957087755203, -0.033682942390441895, -0.01116405613720417, -0.16252531111240387, 0.03230264410376549, 0.05658455193042755, -0.09268078207969666, -0.0035560745745897293, -0.006472574081271887, 0.10562644153833389, 0.06816907227039337, -4.772472905756331e-8, -0.10557419806718826, 0.06059606373310089, -0.012670345604419708, 0.039453648030757904, 0.03447943925857544, -0.043752893805503845, -0.059061355888843536, 0.04930496588349342, 0.11521563678979874, -0.03956226259469986, 0.06490353494882584, 0.04299703240394592, -0.10454916208982468, 0.0383712537586689, -0.04221118614077568, -0.007372448220849037, -0.027361785992980003, -0.06636451184749603, -0.00974158477038145, -0.032610103487968445, 0.017262931913137436, -0.03160545229911804, -0.003418940817937255, 0.0018579534953460097, 0.027563482522964478, -0.09408321231603622, -0.0022505177184939384, 0.02952050231397152, 0.03478435054421425, 0.0409134142100811, -0.01622328720986843, 0.046126969158649445, -0.06440224498510361, 0.0009447300690226257, 0.07428045570850372, -0.055372145026922226, -0.03972073644399643, 0.034320175647735596, -0.023359578102827072, 0.09690005332231522, -0.10676650702953339, 0.0475015789270401, 0.04589606821537018, -0.014560160227119923, 0.06779667735099792, -0.010107696987688541, -0.12793222069740295, 0.02752069942653179, -0.0004830675898119807, -0.09945216774940491, 0.02708503045141697, -0.08453665673732758, 0.06165691465139389, 0.013803243637084961, 0.030562827363610268, 0.01970662735402584, -0.018458278849720955, -0.06091667339205742, -0.0034158150665462017, -0.030474232509732246, -0.022401614114642143, -0.00007690361962886527, 0.006477946415543556, -0.0050242566503584385 ]

{ "pdf_file": "TMS7M2BLG2KPWG6X7X4M6HM6C6EOLKHA.pdf", "text": "May 22, 2000\nDear Interested Citizen,\nThere is a high level of coal bed methane (CBM) development occurring in the Powder River Basin as well as\ncontinued oil well drilling. Since August, 1999, the Buffalo BLM Field Office has received approximately 3,600\nCBM and 24 oil well “Applications for Permits to Drill” (APD’s) on Federal mineral lands in the Powder River\nBasin. The majority of these applications are concentrated in the Wyodak EIS area which encompasses most of\nCampbell County and small portions of eastern Johnson and Sheridan Counties. Approximately 600 of these\napplications have been approved and are in various stages of development. Approximately 500 to 600 hundred\nadditional CBM APD’s could be approved within the parameters of the most recent environmental impact analysis,\nthe Wyodak EIS. Additional environmental analysis will be necessary to approve APD’s beyond the above level. \nBecause of industry demand to continue development of federal oil and gas, the BLM is intending to prepare an\nEnvironmental Impact Statement to analyze the impacts of this action. Part of the analysis will be to determine if\nthe Buffalo Resource Management Plan needs to be amended in order to enable development to continue. The\namount of foreseeable development within Buffalo Field Office area is estimated to be approximately 30,000 CBM\nwells and 3,000 oil wells over the next ten years. These numbers include development on all ownerships. The\nanalysis will encompass all of the Buffalo Area Field Office which is all of Campbell, Johnson, and Sheridan\nCounties and a small portion of northern Converse County. \nWe would appreciate hearing any issues or concerns which you feel should be addressed in the analysis. They can\nbe sent to us on the attached form. In addition to providing comments we have scheduled four meetings to discuss\nthis analysis. The meetings are scheduled as follows:\nHoliday Inn, Sheridan, WY - June 6, 2000 at 7:00 PM\nColonel Bozeman’s, Buffalo, WY - June 7, 2000 at 7:00 PM\nHoliday Inn, Gillette, WY - June 8, 2000 at 7:00 PM\nBest Western, Douglas, WY - June 12, 2000 at 7:00 PM\nThe purpose of the meetings is to provide information to the public regarding the proposal so that you can provide\ninformed comments regarding issues and concerns that should be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement.\nWe would like to receive any comments by June 30, 2000. If you have no comments but would like to receive a\ncopy of the EIS to review, please return the enclosed form with your name and address.\nPlease note that public comments submitted, including names, addresses and e-mail addresses will be available for\npublic review and disclosure at the above address during business hours. You may request confidentiality. If you\nwish to withhold your name, address or e-mail address from public review or from disclosure under the Freedom of\nInformation Act, you must state this plainly at the beginning of your written comment. Such requests will be\nhonored to the extent allowable by law. Any submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals\nidentifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for\npublic inspection in their entirety. \nIf you have any questions, please contact Paul Beels or Richard Zander at (307) 684-1100.\n/S/ Dennis R. Stenger" }

[ 0.07814698666334152, -0.02379661612212658, -0.0555083341896534, 0.06490146368741989, 0.06223933771252632, -0.03782854974269867, -0.1053636223077774, 0.024128776043653488, -0.02964577078819275, -0.046955645084381104, 0.07790260761976242, -0.010212576016783714, 0.013553507626056671, -0.024234486743807793, -0.09286414831876755, -0.0060814013704657555, 0.06462845206260681, -0.006226103752851486, -0.07378943264484406, -0.034909725189208984, 0.0943249762058258, 0.00988919846713543, 0.05915852636098862, -0.03468896076083183, -0.028552521020174026, -0.022679220885038376, -0.06021299585700035, -0.0030569792725145817, 0.0221171323210001, -0.031677357852458954, 0.08506941795349121, 0.07051549851894379, 0.07243400812149048, -0.048755113035440445, 0.02376108057796955, -0.01764131896197796, 0.010023791342973709, -0.09673140943050385, 0.04978099465370178, 0.04776924476027489, 0.02627050131559372, 0.016723550856113434, 0.08775525540113449, -0.05335163697600365, -0.039055828005075455, -0.026778213679790497, -0.07073414325714111, 0.0555533766746521, 0.041159167885780334, 0.07665864378213882, 0.012658096849918365, 0.0986965075135231, 0.015333439223468304, -0.010461138561367989, -0.052183035761117935, -0.0014484417624771595, 0.0451396182179451, 0.010775130242109299, -0.07267581671476364, 0.07089676707983017, 0.055539265275001526, 0.016337305307388306, 0.005482234992086887, -0.05525622516870499, -0.08608173578977585, 0.025691799819469452, -0.1136624813079834, -0.08967564254999161, -0.04763037711381912, -0.0994829386472702, 0.020774828270077705, 0.030888186767697334, 0.03673369064927101, 0.019591715186834335, 0.041295990347862244, 0.01168852113187313, 0.003418775973841548, 0.08421646803617477, 0.04325759783387184, -0.03780581057071686, -0.04451199248433113, -0.05226362496614456, -0.043894052505493164, -0.025678692385554314, -0.014942420646548271, -0.005666205659508705, -0.058275818824768066, 0.09404341131448746, 0.08068150281906128, 0.016726629808545113, -0.03784904628992081, -0.01843217946588993, -0.043802954256534576, 0.0695141851902008, -0.05652087554335594, 0.0798923447728157, 0.0217853132635355, -0.0837201327085495, -0.11665761470794678, -0.03174377977848053, -0.04350791499018669, -0.06361352652311325, 0.03299178555607796, -0.025940999388694763, -0.049724139273166656, -0.02173735946416855, -0.06805261969566345, 0.047491978853940964, -0.011764812283217907, -0.008270848542451859, 0.07957619428634644, -0.009799057617783546, 0.0037148608826100826, 0.049810267984867096, 0.006625148933380842, 0.017078712582588196, 0.044126689434051514, -0.10412871837615967, -0.06464632600545883, -0.0642317607998848, 0.04235851392149925, -0.006367316469550133, 0.027632728219032288, 0.003515439573675394, 0.08912748098373413, -0.028791235759854317, -0.006179125513881445, 7.149798829615153e-34, -0.01651719957590103, 0.017523936927318573, 0.05030140280723572, -0.05817123502492905, -0.03164353966712952, -0.0914079025387764, 0.05875324457883835, -0.0470566488802433, 0.05501089617609978, -0.0024997256696224213, -0.02309149131178856, 0.024242175742983818, 0.0026623732410371304, -0.016738589853048325, 0.023008236661553383, -0.024504942819476128, 0.027566419914364815, -0.01931809075176716, -0.014096707105636597, 0.025564590469002724, 0.04139424115419388, 0.03259842470288277, -0.05512574687600136, 0.12635086476802826, -0.01634269207715988, 0.008201108314096928, -0.0014845080440863967, 0.05342365801334381, -0.007273617200553417, 0.03437497466802597, 0.013276083394885063, -0.022411499172449112, -0.003314664587378502, -0.06199052184820175, 0.05213605612516403, 0.014296388253569603, 0.008093727752566338, -0.036012496799230576, -0.049183137714862823, 0.049785200506448746, 0.008188169449567795, -0.018937483429908752, 0.10100699961185455, 0.04670143499970436, -0.03873231261968613, 0.02282589115202427, -0.020000090822577477, 0.046270664781332016, 0.08424313366413116, 0.013918787240982056, 0.020627429708838463, 0.047149818390607834, 0.06966955214738846, 0.03577341139316559, 0.03632915019989014, -0.026807837188243866, -0.08508490025997162, -0.02831406705081463, 0.052505720406770706, 0.006773286499083042, -0.029817085713148117, -0.013061066158115864, -0.02787637896835804, 0.027415867894887924, -0.10273165255784988, -0.05691961944103241, 0.09366234391927719, 0.03356383368372917, -0.04499702900648117, 0.08974636346101761, 0.034824442118406296, 0.004536019638180733, 0.0055802664719522, 0.03372636437416077, 0.08623824268579483, -0.0203720610588789, 0.10436133295297623, 0.0036286707036197186, 0.0010062477085739374, 0.03660532087087631, 0.06525558233261108, -0.007233069743961096, -0.06430678069591522, 0.041748251765966415, -0.00037683930713683367, -0.024788158014416695, -0.08133804798126221, 0.087862528860569, 0.07408228516578674, -0.00771457701921463, 0.0056250742636621, -0.014867044053971767, 0.021418310701847076, -0.014579521492123604, -0.006750729400664568, -1.0412960586415765e-33, -0.09086978435516357, 0.024632642045617104, 0.03493192791938782, 0.08088800311088562, -0.024469362571835518, -0.03812571242451668, 0.026084043085575104, 0.045006729662418365, 0.06281057000160217, -0.061525825411081314, -0.09311327338218689, 0.06409437209367752, -0.049959756433963776, 0.004589506890624762, -0.036666955798864365, 0.09910473972558975, -0.013403169810771942, -0.03520571067929268, 0.01654411107301712, -0.03393550589680672, -0.17526119947433472, 0.020748155191540718, 0.06227476894855499, 0.028987037017941475, -0.029415056109428406, 0.06655791401863098, -0.08537067472934723, -0.036762785166502, -0.08586367219686508, -0.030047526583075523, -0.003614017041400075, -0.09688668698072433, -0.019514335319399834, 0.02289043739438057, -0.08555465191602707, -0.056151870638132095, 0.05755273625254631, -0.054437845945358276, -0.023026900365948677, -0.008117876946926117, 0.002065449021756649, -0.036510128527879715, -0.02298184670507908, 0.06300752609968185, -0.029704518616199493, -0.04989509657025337, -0.034698136150836945, -0.027971627190709114, 0.054063353687524796, 0.05500326678156853, -0.007389409001916647, 0.15146109461784363, 0.007325208280235529, 0.015422936528921127, 0.00684586213901639, -0.08278580754995346, 0.09254781901836395, 0.10090772807598114, -0.04220350459218025, 0.020933451130986214, 0.007959958165884018, 0.026717767119407654, -0.05727825313806534, 0.0425853431224823, 0.08324999362230301, -0.0060133798979222775, -0.017690375447273254, 0.03252105042338371, -0.0649838075041771, 0.04931517317891121, 0.007737442851066589, 0.02486782893538475, 0.061379317194223404, -0.002064232248812914, 0.00036387142608873546, 0.12209127843379974, 0.022253617644309998, 0.04011983051896095, -0.03280879184603691, 0.09128184616565704, 0.08940662443637848, -0.06407938152551651, 0.054048050194978714, -0.03174977749586105, -0.07345915585756302, 0.015416054055094719, -0.0118887759745121, -0.020823180675506592, 0.02250644378364086, 0.022884579375386238, -0.1084165871143341, 0.009320806711912155, -0.03678209334611893, -0.03540497273206711, 0.050689563155174255, -3.954695415586684e-8, -0.03548301383852959, 0.07017164677381516, 0.009669794701039791, -0.017024897038936615, 0.06023214012384415, 0.05556086078286171, -0.007309251464903355, 0.05930652096867561, 0.004575355444103479, 0.016519056633114815, 0.016420725733041763, 0.07258650660514832, -0.051101721823215485, 0.016038255766034126, -0.05856744199991226, -0.1033429354429245, -0.00868743285536766, 0.060021355748176575, 0.01930919848382473, -0.030555274337530136, -0.07326879352331161, 0.048759788274765015, -0.08436858654022217, -0.0637350007891655, 0.010737438686192036, -0.02911197394132614, -0.05088932439684868, 0.012639821507036686, 0.02052275277674198, 0.009737051092088223, 0.051055241376161575, -0.05261646583676338, -0.003003721358254552, 0.007567029446363449, -0.06543157994747162, -0.05746705085039139, -0.08054746687412262, 0.03798713535070419, 0.001429384108632803, -0.024642610922455788, -0.026998041197657585, 0.04600832238793373, 0.007677675224840641, 0.020641878247261047, -0.018563007935881615, 0.03469883278012276, -0.04543040320277214, -0.03167623654007912, 0.07763694226741791, -0.027664752677083015, -0.01794665865600109, -0.07103850692510605, -0.030890798196196556, -0.011391357518732548, 0.001548368134535849, -0.038324762135744095, 0.002749611856415868, -0.02091086097061634, 0.006678964011371136, -0.07031873613595963, -0.042147841304540634, -0.0057412744499742985, -0.03535417094826698, 0.09709251672029495 ]

{ "pdf_file": "I26R4ZZQ3EN7S4L4IXK4R7XVVJ2DIPHP.pdf", "text": "Flaxseed 2016\nHarvested Acres by County\nfor Selected States\nU.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service\n Acres\nNot Estimated\n< 2,500\n2,500 - 3,499\n3,500 - 5,999\n6,000 - 9,999\n10,000 - 19,999\n20,000 +" }

[ 0.01984291896224022, -0.022997422143816948, -0.00810114573687315, 0.023133978247642517, -0.05674261972308159, 0.0271376334130764, -0.06918008625507355, 0.024306492879986763, -0.11345136910676956, 0.011936087161302567, -0.09494561702013016, -0.05978425592184067, -0.00007929877028800547, 0.035909220576286316, -0.05659795179963112, 0.12667757272720337, 0.048076484352350235, -0.027339158579707146, 0.021555015817284584, 0.0157519169151783, 0.06148838996887207, 0.018108895048499107, -0.06620040535926819, -0.10203460603952408, 0.010559740476310253, 0.05830063298344612, -0.015079746022820473, 0.12197256088256836, -0.06711520254611969, -0.09169639647006989, -0.10120159387588501, 0.026299091055989265, -0.005518072750419378, -0.022973977029323578, 0.054147250950336456, -0.036903344094753265, -0.03928365185856819, 0.004992133472114801, 0.06276760995388031, -0.045680686831474304, -0.04237792640924454, 0.01456724014133215, 0.051383260637521744, 0.05580905079841614, -0.024123813956975937, 0.06470224261283875, -0.11282539367675781, 0.029949024319648743, 0.0373457632958889, -0.00027781116659753025, 0.10170308500528336, 0.048566922545433044, -0.06012185662984848, 0.0978735089302063, 0.003522048704326153, -0.04212220013141632, -0.09065672755241394, -0.05528031289577484, 0.013859213329851627, -0.0031620885711163282, 0.014486298896372318, 0.02402930147945881, -0.05289718136191368, -0.010648973286151886, -0.0074905757792294025, 0.008941668085753918, -0.12253446131944656, 0.04366016387939453, -0.052520863711833954, -0.07380685210227966, 0.015989182516932487, -0.01806805096566677, -0.05352206155657768, -0.01767328940331936, 0.04864681139588356, -0.034464750438928604, 0.05444472283124924, 0.011071799322962761, 0.011217876337468624, 0.013538739643990993, -0.1258271485567093, -0.002098299330100417, -0.008463387377560139, 0.005596360191702843, -0.01738584041595459, 0.028559328988194466, -0.022762387990951538, 0.04882946237921715, 0.03876526281237602, 0.0010968788992613554, 0.02307528257369995, 0.013489697128534317, -0.02058027870953083, 0.010683001019060612, -0.0011592268710955977, -0.0001516843622084707, -0.08695243299007416, -0.042496003210544586, -0.0014897689688950777, 0.02186376042664051, -0.037431828677654266, -0.02855565957725048, 0.07714489847421646, -0.028158657252788544, 0.019421396777033806, -0.028244227170944214, 0.05208189785480499, 0.11120016872882843, 0.046722959727048874, -0.0022135216277092695, 0.09871931374073029, 0.0022230406757444143, 0.01752372831106186, -0.007735338062047958, -0.027910925447940826, 0.00531794223934412, -0.011621001176536083, -0.05070774257183075, 0.042570799589157104, 0.0011104632867500186, 0.05299549549818039, 0.027489643543958664, -0.010817257687449455, -0.01564691588282585, -0.06768203526735306, 0.04782005026936531, 0.006158176809549332, 1.7117741223874098e-32, -0.04672534391283989, -0.12182153016328812, 0.0435824878513813, -0.023051992058753967, 0.05259270220994949, -0.055178433656692505, -0.04377112537622452, -0.0020735745783895254, -0.00919336173683405, 0.018882352858781815, -0.05832599103450775, 0.003893786808475852, 0.014959825202822685, -0.036116525530815125, 0.05058301240205765, -0.0928739532828331, 0.04944605752825737, -0.0039748540148139, -0.012532196007668972, -0.03497893735766411, 0.03905463218688965, -0.011091564781963825, 0.023146675899624825, -0.02999665029346943, -0.02947990410029888, -0.05766180902719498, 0.026524754241108894, -0.01950678601861, 0.0021966807544231415, 0.027162985876202583, -0.03401702642440796, 0.023752331733703613, -0.03399204462766647, -0.022835876792669296, 0.008880788460373878, 0.011418194510042667, 0.019022997468709946, 0.012814001180231571, -0.04913369566202164, 0.0003853651287499815, -0.031609196215867996, -0.03482562676072121, -0.06394854187965393, 0.03434254601597786, 0.001515494892373681, -0.023709511384367943, 0.08446674793958664, -0.01722079887986183, -0.07939587533473969, 0.0874461680650711, -0.03615054488182068, 0.024316761642694473, -0.10181237757205963, 0.07738190144300461, -0.02581953816115856, 0.03327265381813049, 0.02190053090453148, 0.012372716329991817, 0.04341341555118561, 0.09528981149196625, -0.0807785615324974, 0.030647937208414078, 0.031320955604314804, 0.0010658162645995617, 0.07493522763252258, 0.016558557748794556, 0.013620501384139061, -0.04932161793112755, -0.011810146272182465, -0.01666250452399254, 0.007016678806394339, -0.1437721699476242, 0.09096895158290863, 0.018090615049004555, 0.012464991770684719, 0.011240608058869839, 0.027473097667098045, 0.051580049097537994, 0.03408361226320267, -0.043750256299972534, -0.09108280390501022, 0.040434371680021286, -0.018378935754299164, 0.08016856759786606, 0.06719337403774261, -0.07640385627746582, 0.019149860367178917, -0.09295716136693954, -0.04036745801568031, -0.04277687147259712, -0.06244831532239914, 0.01441382896155119, -0.06418157368898392, -0.07994679361581802, -0.004221563693135977, -1.659737191528415e-32, -0.005014465656131506, 0.05707259476184845, 0.02225503697991371, -0.0395776629447937, 0.008921635337173939, -0.05113450810313225, 0.07209546864032745, -0.07293100655078888, 0.10147399455308914, 0.040811508893966675, -0.025878971442580223, 0.0007637451053597033, -0.008148794993758202, -0.005674528423696756, 0.026327399536967278, 0.028853489086031914, -0.0002973236551042646, -0.003402844537049532, -0.028276143595576286, 0.021773042157292366, -0.03452611342072487, 0.051547709852457047, -0.06848441064357758, 0.03462202474474907, -0.02050643414258957, 0.035477373749017715, -0.06516515463590622, -0.07743877917528152, 0.01893436722457409, -0.014058677479624748, -0.05647549405694008, -0.06733673810958862, -0.010074926540255547, 0.06709593534469604, -0.060900840908288956, -0.00032158655812963843, 0.11724217981100082, 0.13809122145175934, 0.03397899121046066, 0.031056979671120644, 0.11741700023412704, -0.044277675449848175, 0.00652535492554307, 0.02028844505548477, 0.008516526781022549, -0.004453696776181459, -0.011328248307108879, -0.07193848490715027, 0.02904690057039261, 0.039143819361925125, 0.0036499626003205776, 0.08742634207010269, -0.05436968058347702, 0.019676195457577705, 0.011732193641364574, -0.07157648354768753, 0.1045294925570488, -0.02764095738530159, -0.05795765668153763, -0.049688372761011124, 0.03040323778986931, 0.03371734544634819, -0.034308213740587234, 0.0507519394159317, 0.06115909293293953, -0.047255899757146835, -0.08956333249807358, -0.14338822662830353, -0.00600088806822896, -0.034097444266080856, -0.1536918431520462, 0.007204690016806126, 0.014513913542032242, -0.07162132859230042, 0.025625169277191162, -0.030110500752925873, 0.03684713691473007, -0.014958781190216541, 0.016179488971829414, 0.03620815649628639, -0.05651410296559334, 0.031982582062482834, 0.06129639595746994, 0.07502979040145874, 0.0147344209253788, -0.04066517949104309, 0.022568486630916595, -0.058974068611860275, 0.0854640007019043, 0.0987582728266716, -0.023711511865258217, 0.05670572817325592, -0.028386708348989487, 0.004257730673998594, -0.05192980915307999, -5.89166297970678e-8, -0.03283775970339775, 0.06073562055826187, -0.07627254724502563, 0.025488553568720818, 0.05311482027173042, 0.02535366266965866, 0.03458426520228386, 0.04366639256477356, 0.005452340003103018, 0.024607161059975624, 0.0628231093287468, 0.04536610469222069, -0.06646756827831268, -0.005942826624959707, -0.027807293459773064, -0.006954246666282415, 0.000675815565045923, -0.0483819805085659, -0.026528460904955864, -0.01123015210032463, -0.033375438302755356, 0.019800059497356415, -0.04191844165325165, 0.009035205468535423, 0.011838311329483986, -0.10788425803184509, -0.037663817405700684, -0.019728245213627815, 0.03611455112695694, 0.05915391445159912, 0.043563101440668106, 0.04729001596570015, -0.08091221749782562, -0.053839556872844696, 0.1088818684220314, -0.036632370203733444, -0.04788461700081825, 0.01810065098106861, 0.01007184386253357, 0.05257934704422951, -0.05596958473324776, 0.036344435065984726, -0.004197506234049797, 0.0506090372800827, 0.10901012271642685, 0.009233659133315086, -0.13166309893131256, 0.012438543140888214, 0.0567798987030983, -0.07657235860824585, -0.02153698168694973, -0.03230702877044678, 0.02680143527686596, 0.0019686550367623568, 0.019214628264307976, 0.1164981946349144, -0.04065866768360138, -0.054164525121450424, -0.010195255279541016, -0.009639766067266464, 0.04897814989089966, 0.029346145689487457, -0.005485923029482365, -0.0038855106104165316 ]

{ "pdf_file": "HE2GQLBH2WBUUJKRBNZCYY5QZWTVCY35.pdf", "text": "List B: bridge capacity for permits 150,000 pounds or less\nKCOUNTY BRIDGE_ID VIL_TOWN_CITY FEATURE_ON FEATURE_UNDER LOCATION MVW LOAD_PSTG_DESC\nBAYFIELD B040014 T-BARNES STH 27 EAU CLAIRE RIVER 17.4M N JCT STH 77 TO W 140\nBROWN B050080 T-WRIGHTSTOWN USH 41 SB APPLE CREEK 2.4M S JCT CTH S 140\nBROWN B050728 T-HOBART STH 54 DUCK CREEK 0.5M E JCT CTH J 8040 TON\nBROWN B0507360002 V-WRIGHTSTOWN STH 96 - FERRY ST FOX RIVER 1.4M E JCT CTH U 130\nBUFFALO B060017 C-FOUNTAIN CITY STH 35-MAIN ST MISSISSIPPI RIVER TRIB 0.1M N JCT CTH YY 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nBUFFALO B060011 T-ALMA STH 37 BR BUFFALO RIVER 0.7M N JCT CTH N 140\nBUFFALO B060013 T-BUFFALO STH 35 MISSISSIPPI RIVER TRIB 0.9M N JCT STH 54 TO W 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nBUFFALO B060016 C-FOUNTAIN CITY STH 35-MAIN ST MISSISSIPPI RIVER TRIB 3.1M N JCT STH 54 TO W 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nBUFFALO B060012 T-ALMA STH 37 HUTCHINSON CREEK 0.1M N JCT CTH NN 130\nBUFFALO B060019 T-NELSON STH 25 MISSISSIPPI RIVER SLOUGH 2.1M N MINN STATE LINE 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nCHIPPEWA B090062 T-WOODMOHR USH 53 SB HIGH LINE AVE 5.8M S JCT STH 40 TO N 130\nCHIPPEWA B090010 T-EAGLE POINT STH 178 ONEIL CREEK 2.8M N JCT CTH S 140\nCHIPPEWA B090061 T-WOODMOHR USH 53 NB 130TH AVE. 2.4M N JCT CTH B TO E 130\nCHIPPEWA B090078 C-BLOOMER STH 40-17TH ST USH 53 2.0M N JCT CTH A 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nCOLUMBIA B110015 T-ARLINGTON IH 90 EB-IH 94 EB STH 60 3.9M E JCT CTH CS TO W 140\nCOLUMBIA P111000 T-LODI STH 113 WISCONSIN RIVER - SUMMER COLSAC FERRY 168 TON LOAD LIMIT\nCRAWFORD B120618 V-GAYS MILLS STH 131-A ST DELLAMATER HOLLOW CREE 1.2M N JCT STH 171 8040 TON\nCRAWFORD B120019 T-MARIETTA USH 61 RICHLAND CREEK 0.3M N JCT STH 60 TO E 130\nCRAWFORD B120831 V-SOLDIERS GROVE STH 131-PINE ST KICKAPOO RIVER 3.4M N JCT CTH X 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nCRAWFORD B120170 T-SENECA STH 171 JOY HOLLOW CREEK 3.8M E. JCT STH 35 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nCRAWFORD B120009 T-FREEMAN STH 82 MISSISSIPPI RIVER 04 AT IOWA STATE LINE 8027-40-40 TON NRBR\nCRAWFORD B120013 V-SOLDIERS GROVE USH 61-STH 131-4TH ST TROUT CREEK 1.1M N JCT STH 131 TO S 130\nDANE B130479 T-WINDSOR STH 19 TOKEN CREEK 1.0M E JCT USH 51 TO N 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nDOUGLAS B160075 V-OLIVER STH 105-UNION ST ST LOUIS RIVER AT MINNESOTA STATE LINE 14Closed To All Oversize\nDUNN B170023 T-MENOMONIE IH 94 EB K 5.3M E JCT CTH Q TO N 145\nDUNN B170024 T-MENOMONIE IH 94 WB K 4.4M W JCT STH 25 TO N 145\nFOND DU LAC B200030 T-CALUMET USH 151 PIPE CREEK 0.3M N JCT CTH W 140\nGREEN B230021 T-EXETER STH 92 ROSS CROSSING CREEK 1.2M E JCT STH 69 TO N 130\nIOWA B250005 T-PULASKI STH 133 MORREY CREEK 0.5M N JCT STH 80 TO S 140\nIRON B260005 T-MERCER USH 51 WEBER CREEK 2.1M N JCT CTH FF 140\nIRON B260002 T-SHERMAN STH 182 BEAR RIVER 27.8M E JCT STH 13 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nJACKSON B270808 T-ALMA STH 95 SISSON CREEK 2.7M E JCT CTH F 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nJACKSON B270846 T-CLEVELAND USH 12-STH 27 COON CREEK 7.5M E JCT CTH M TO E 140\nKENOSHA B300018 V-PLEASANT PRAIRIE IH 94 WB-USH 41 NB K 1.3M W JCT STH 50 TO E 140\nKENOSHA B300017 T-BRISTOL IH 94 EB-USH 41 SB K 0.8M E JCT STH 158 TO E 140\nLA CROSSE B320115 T-MEDARY STH 16 EB LA CROSSE RIVER 3.9M E JCT STH 35 140\nPage 1 of 2 04-29-09 List B: bridge capacity for permits 150,000 pounds or less\nLAFAYETTE B330831 T-WIOTA STH 78 CHERRY CREEK 1.7M N JCT CTH D 140\nMANITOWOC B360895 T-MANITOWOC RAPIDS USH 10 BRANCH RIVER 1.9M E JCT CTH T 140\nMARINETTE B380513 V-WAUSAUKEE USH 141-MAIN ST WAUSAUKEE RIVER 0.9M N JCT STH 180 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nMONROE B410389 C-SPARTA STH 16-STH 71-WISC AVE MILWAUKEE AVE 0.5M E JCT STH 21 (E) 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nPIERCE B470982 T-DIAMOND BLUFF STH 35 TRIMBELLE RIVER 0.4M N JCT CTH K 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nPOLK B480224 V-OSCEOLA STH 243 ST CROIX RIVER 06 AT MINNESOTA STATE LINE 10050 TON LOAD LIMIT\nPRICE B500007 T-SPIRIT STH 102 S FK SPIRIT RIVER 5.4M N JCT CTH C 8040 TON\nRACINE B510017 T-MOUNT PLEASANT IH 94 WB-USH 41 NB BRAUN RD 5.1M W JCT STH 142 TO E 140\nRACINE B510021 T-YORKVILLE IH 94 WB-USH 41 NB 58TH RD 0.4M W JCT STH 11 TO E 140\nRACINE B510016 T-MOUNT PLEASANT IH 94 EB-USH 41 SB BRAUN RD 0.8M E JCT STH 11 TO E 140\nRACINE B510020 T-YORKVILLE IH 94 EB-USH 41 SB 58TH RD 2.2M E JCT STH 20 TO E 140\nRICHLAND B520856 T-BUENA VISTA STH 130-STH 133 WISCONSIN RIVER 05 0.4M N JCT STH 133 TO S 9045 TON NRBR\nRICHLAND B520044 T-ROCKBRIDGE STH 80 PINE RIVER 0.1M N JCT CTH D TO E 140\nRICHLAND B520021 T-BUENA VISTA STH 130 BEAR CREEK 0.4M N JCT CTH B TO W 140\nRICHLAND B520020 T-BUENA VISTA STH 130 BEAR CREEK 0.4M N JCT CTH B TO E 140\nROCK B530145 T-FULTON USH 51 ROCK RIVER 0.9M N JCT CTH M TO W 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nROCK C530036 T-PORTER STH 59 SPRING CREEK 0.5M W. JCT STH 138 4020 TON LOAD LIMIT\nROCK B530945 T-MAGNOLIA STH 213 BR ALLEN CREEK 1.2M N JCT CTH A 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nST. CROIX B550691 C-GLENWOOD CITY STH 128-OAK ST TIFFANY CREEK 2.3M N JCT CTH DD 140\nST. CROIX B550919 T-SAINT JOSEPH STH 64 ST CROIX RIVER 05 AT MINNESOTA STATE LINE 80Closed To All Oversize\nTAYLOR B600483 T-GOODRICH STH 64 BIG RIB RIVER 2.4M E JCT STH 97 8040 TON\nTREMPEALEAU B610035 T-ALBION STH 93 ADAMS CREEK 0.5M N JCT CTH U 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nTREMPEALEAU B610948 C-GALESVILLE USH 53-MAIN ST BEAVER CREEK 0.5M N JCT STH 54 TO E 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nVERNON B620020 T-WEBSTER STH 82 OTTER CREEK 0.4M E JCT CTH D 130\nVERNON B620024 T-WEBSTER STH 82 OTTER CREEK 1.1M E JCT CTH D TO N 12060 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWALWORTH B640665 T-LYONS STH 36 ORE CREEK 2.5M N JCT STH 120 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWALWORTH B640008 T-LYONS STH 120 COMO CREEK 1.0M N JCT USH 12 TO E 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWALWORTH B640123 T-DARIEN IH 43 SB ELM RIDGE RD 3.1M S JCT STH 50 TO W 11055 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWALWORTH B640011 T-EAST TROY STH 20 HONEY CREEK 1.4M E JCT CTH L 8040 TON\nWALWORTH B640122 T-DARIEN IH 43 NB ELM RIDGE RD 3.5M N JCT USH 14 TO E 11055 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWAUKESHA B670027 T-SUMMIT USH 18 BARK RIVER 3.6M E JCT CTH BB 140\nWAUPACA B680427 T-SCANDINAVIA STH 49 S BR LITTLE WOLF RIVER 7.7M N JCT STH 22 TO S 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWAUPACA B680036 C-CLINTONVILLE STH 22-MAIN ST PIGEON RIVER 0.2M N JCT USH 45 TO N 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWAUPACA B680739 T-ROYALTON STH 54 BR LITTLE WOLF RIVER 0.9M E JCT CTH O TO S 9045 TON LOAD LIMIT\nWINNEBAGO B7009130002 V-WINNECONNE STH 116-MAIN ST WOLF RIVER 0.2M E JCT CTH B 140\nPage 2 of 2 04-29-09" }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "BTV7FPFDLIGZEEUQ3ODJ2J7BJ57HJXTG.pdf", "text": "" }

[ -0.09254190325737, 0.07431026548147202, 0.07963550090789795, -0.04506760090589523, 0.03662924841046333, 0.0008849797304719687, -0.029534010216593742, 0.09329929947853088, -0.03723961114883423, -0.007853532209992409, -0.006007038988173008, 0.004078690893948078, -0.07910999655723572, -0.03317246958613396, 0.023815983906388283, 0.03558200225234032, 0.012754347175359726, -0.03467395529150963, -0.08387242257595062, 0.0884799137711525, -0.029182203114032745, -0.04831342771649361, -0.03454618901014328, 0.04904833436012268, -0.008514991961419582, 0.006800858303904533, 0.028622332960367203, 0.03156047314405441, -0.06196139007806778, -0.039192695170640945, -0.03083900921046734, 0.05402803048491478, 0.019154449924826622, 0.02794189378619194, 0.17193074524402618, 0.06811917573213577, -0.0011698760790750384, 0.032328054308891296, 0.007806546986103058, -0.02233254536986351, 0.01586579531431198, -0.10333124548196793, -0.005312533117830753, 0.03562947362661362, -0.006172246765345335, -0.10704436898231506, 0.03392159566283226, -0.05833548307418823, -0.018430570140480995, 0.02492939680814743, 0.010676552541553974, -0.016141582280397415, -0.02038740925490856, 0.0008945458102971315, -0.04374765604734421, 0.022825229912996292, -0.009210855700075626, 0.023935649544000626, -0.003264503786340356, 0.012895778752863407, -0.006360347848385572, -0.09300629049539566, -0.09463942795991898, 0.0220755934715271, -0.028792448341846466, 0.0021540422458201647, -0.053397491574287415, -0.009740931913256645, -0.07171184569597244, 0.003487945767119527, 0.06193297356367111, -0.04905858263373375, -0.03926447406411171, -0.001984195550903678, -0.012184642255306244, 0.027850857004523277, 0.04596809297800064, 0.04687678813934326, 0.09238377213478088, -0.030767852440476418, 0.022159861400723457, -0.07117459923028946, -0.05005033314228058, -0.0513138584792614, -0.07395124435424805, -0.04369334131479263, 0.036400023847818375, 0.04803899675607681, 0.10878001898527145, -0.028796551749110222, 0.06533906608819962, 0.00038917415076866746, 0.019040800631046295, -0.006008349824696779, 0.1064220741391182, 0.019020915031433105, -0.11237481236457825, -0.013368277810513973, -0.01774093508720398, 0.09214998781681061, 0.07264720648527145, 0.09063075482845306, -0.12332874536514282, -0.041174110025167465, -0.013765822164714336, -0.04843806475400925, -0.08076046407222748, 0.08965540677309036, 0.046914465725421906, -0.06446293741464615, -0.04688067361712456, -0.020181434229016304, 0.0008612628444097936, -0.03877704218029976, -0.014579354785382748, 0.0019423665944486856, -0.040589362382888794, -0.017730172723531723, 0.08437998592853546, -0.08845845609903336, 0.0702022910118103, 0.04003782197833061, -0.0343659371137619, 0.002343251835554838, -0.05441717058420181, 0.01805906556546688, -0.018845222890377045, 2.608249864754856e-33, -0.12575584650039673, 0.03346184268593788, 0.03892608359456062, -0.0040571363642811775, 0.07039691507816315, 0.010303327813744545, -0.05989452823996544, -0.014734401367604733, -0.09557362645864487, -0.03993433713912964, -0.0660976991057396, 0.07137418538331985, 0.028000935912132263, -0.0636393204331398, -0.05974466726183891, -0.05399264395236969, 0.05640039220452309, 0.06811705976724625, 0.06946061551570892, -0.030453013256192207, 0.05323982983827591, -0.0547812394797802, -0.030198577791452408, 0.017063289880752563, -0.039704419672489166, -0.08345594257116318, -0.00282934564165771, -0.045140549540519714, 0.08720770478248596, 0.01680382713675499, 0.030029334127902985, 0.0329945906996727, 0.02286539413034916, 0.03787538781762123, 0.022468814626336098, 0.06482624262571335, 0.013497539795935154, -0.018262138590216637, -0.019010713323950768, -0.03519534319639206, -0.04306908696889877, 0.05221915245056152, 0.01146297063678503, 0.005535003263503313, -0.019521698355674744, -0.03249804675579071, 0.08614494651556015, 0.025457635521888733, 0.00850151851773262, -0.0007603204576298594, -0.042024604976177216, 0.06474283337593079, -0.022958047688007355, -0.006736363749951124, -0.012760966084897518, -0.07337380945682526, -0.03827119246125221, -0.04494977369904518, 0.03456134349107742, 0.01643344946205616, -0.00621801195666194, 0.04426433518528938, -0.037694573402404785, -0.011929396539926529, -0.08418837934732437, -0.030056815594434738, -0.06002344936132431, 0.013697879388928413, -0.0027681011706590652, -0.054344259202480316, 0.0105641670525074, 0.05082542076706886, 0.05664936825633049, -0.022606277838349342, -0.042391348630189896, -0.037123169749975204, -0.023519286885857582, 0.09742993861436844, 0.019288253039121628, -0.04551421478390694, 0.020678145810961723, -0.06913875788450241, 0.03929479047656059, 0.026549221947789192, 0.06225036457180977, -0.03283802047371864, -0.027009129524230957, -0.015475586988031864, 0.039386600255966187, 0.031467512249946594, -0.10491819679737091, 0.04063693806529045, -0.10585679113864899, 0.06714290380477905, 0.06285890191793442, -3.937017107651854e-33, -0.014099051244556904, -0.008263323456048965, -0.07275000214576721, -0.023324228823184967, -0.003529520006850362, 0.03372703865170479, -0.07673279941082001, -0.05302836745977402, 0.0812084749341011, -0.019322797656059265, -0.02540609985589981, 0.012845992110669613, 0.04746270552277565, -0.059404488652944565, -0.1284305900335312, -0.019588669762015343, -0.016368728131055832, -0.08462005853652954, -0.0020584422163665295, -0.02470262162387371, 0.008872111327946186, 0.049331314861774445, -0.11451566964387894, 0.04924438148736954, 0.01143382117152214, 0.09540955722332001, 0.03356371819972992, 0.019851716235280037, -0.004194802138954401, -0.014121292158961296, -0.05973302200436592, -0.03194738179445267, -0.05608978867530823, 0.05661550164222717, 0.06777951121330261, 0.10482403635978699, 0.13970103859901428, 0.05949700251221657, -0.02044265903532505, 0.018356624990701675, 0.041535843163728714, 0.03525543957948685, 0.08214759826660156, -0.02720562182366848, 0.04544951021671295, -0.04933098331093788, 0.06655561178922653, -0.04790635406970978, -0.002668780507519841, 0.05840568616986275, -0.08386490494012833, -0.045382898300886154, 0.08738405257463455, 0.027699250727891922, -0.03997805342078209, -0.010990189388394356, 0.07192348688840866, -0.02188122645020485, -0.10377565026283264, -0.008654332719743252, 0.1012529656291008, 0.0727105438709259, 0.01893465965986252, -0.058479901403188705, 0.016576308757066727, -0.017301972955465317, -0.00659629562869668, -0.05626804381608963, 0.08410115540027618, -0.045294392853975296, -0.015879441052675247, -0.025476893410086632, -0.03851001337170601, -0.07239064574241638, 0.03919722139835358, 0.032544661313295364, 0.07224167883396149, -0.07434611767530441, -0.051371414214372635, 0.006088516674935818, -0.01967591419816017, 0.04697423800826073, 0.009965675882995129, -0.04207306355237961, 0.02373356558382511, -0.017656482756137848, 0.08696278929710388, 0.01574210822582245, 0.06039062514901161, 0.019561108201742172, -0.0668923407793045, 0.016300972551107407, -0.019158657640218735, 0.10011152923107147, -0.04037746042013168, -6.340905400747943e-8, 0.017200889065861702, -0.018007539212703705, -0.022032592445611954, 0.07111603766679764, 0.08361080288887024, -0.05542347580194473, 0.010159620083868504, -0.022184865549206734, -0.021836215630173683, -0.043331023305654526, 0.0631447359919548, -0.013718401081860065, -0.00859231036156416, 0.0029241363517940044, 0.013575095683336258, 0.014364972710609436, -0.008158361539244652, -0.0033954146783798933, -0.0624501071870327, 0.021245630457997322, 0.005783638451248407, 0.04963182285428047, 0.05616087466478348, -0.009413061663508415, 0.00980773102492094, 0.025300608947873116, -0.0025248664896935225, 0.09159029275178909, 0.012043268419802189, 0.008996360935270786, -0.0723235011100769, 0.06492585688829422, -0.038011983036994934, -0.037285901606082916, -0.001978948712348938, -0.057884760200977325, -0.015613221563398838, 0.0430426225066185, 0.012554473243653774, 0.08385041356086731, -0.0475044846534729, -0.057428233325481415, 0.006641433574259281, 0.038426462560892105, 0.026793716475367546, -0.03230814263224602, -0.08486052602529526, -0.035805173218250275, 0.03573900833725929, 0.07339178025722504, -0.0027691256254911423, -0.024344000965356827, 0.05083397775888443, 0.05110602825880051, 0.006318646017462015, 0.058326225727796555, -0.02010088786482811, 0.060514770448207855, -0.07439784705638885, 0.016072047874331474, -0.07161299139261246, -0.0663786306977272, -0.0637420043349266, 0.07138366252183914 ]

{ "pdf_file": "NCPYKKHSEFYCQGPJBOUJR3XLMIV5A2WT.pdf", "text": " \n \n \n \n \nMs. Mary Cottrell February 12, 2002 \nSecretary \nMassachusetts Dept of Telecommunications and Energy \nOne South Station \nBoston, Mass 02110 \n \nMs. Cottrell, \n \nI am requesting an extension to the filing date of comments on Docket #01 -100, which is \ndue to day. \n \nI am an interested party in that I have a great deal of knowledge and experience in the \nenergy markets and derivative instruments. I represent one party other than myself. I \nonly learned of this NOI last Friday when talking to colleague. As this NOI deals with \nthe heart of my field of expertise I would like to participate in the process. Unfortunately, \nyour timetable is, to no fault of yours, short notice to me. I am therefore asking for a one -\nweek extension to Tuesday of next week to respond. \n \nI plan on suggesting a course of action that may prove to be an interesting compromise \nbetween the advocates of retail access and those against it. The issue of the use of \nderivative markets is not to be taken lightly as we’ve all seen with the Enron case. The \ninput from a derivative expert without any strong bias for “making a profit” on your \ndecision I think will be of value to you. \n \nThanks you very much for your consideration. \n \nSincerely, \n \n \n \nD. Neil Levy \nDNL Risk Management \ndneillevy@aol.com \n \n \ncc: William Stevens, hearing officer " }

[ -0.040743451565504074, 0.05629965290427208, 0.05284697562456131, 0.019828645512461662, 0.029214482754468918, -0.04849649965763092, -0.004733961075544357, -0.0009606885141693056, -0.058310214430093765, -0.012958361767232418, -0.026933716610074043, -0.15393276512622833, -0.022072674706578255, 0.02835269086062908, -0.08255217969417572, -0.044400542974472046, 0.08577818423509598, 0.04873163625597954, -0.09636113792657852, -0.035128090530633926, 0.04941709712147713, 0.03562916815280914, -0.037335991859436035, -0.06941583007574081, 0.013298067264258862, -0.05862811207771301, -0.12492039054632187, -0.02042597159743309, 0.04243069142103195, -0.026793068274855614, 0.043885257095098495, 0.0022266192827373743, -0.02106500416994095, -0.040221698582172394, -0.015597785823047161, -0.023901619017124176, -0.027123887091875076, -0.012993458658456802, -0.05016859248280525, 0.025984475389122963, -0.05639401450753212, -0.013675193302333355, -0.02188057266175747, -0.020974673330783844, -0.02757485769689083, 0.03981005400419235, -0.023994464427232742, 0.008986114524304867, -0.027109595015645027, -0.020443208515644073, -0.007135931868106127, 0.020655015483498573, -0.07795307785272598, -0.006745076738297939, 0.010466719046235085, -0.07569342106580734, -0.0013614821946248412, -0.11333365738391876, -0.042256757616996765, -0.06869813054800034, -0.0669601783156395, -0.002165525918826461, -0.02895202301442623, -0.043345287442207336, 0.014015075750648975, 0.017450429499149323, -0.03339154273271561, 0.010314089246094227, 0.038140226155519485, -0.02599823847413063, -0.03757570683956146, -0.006436049938201904, 0.01351418998092413, -0.028132401406764984, -0.09385266155004501, 0.002354072406888008, -0.009618177078664303, -0.017217818647623062, 0.00229284749366343, -0.05604501813650131, 0.015142126008868217, -0.0014450992457568645, -0.011437922716140747, -0.06223860755562782, -0.00360203068703413, 0.09492728859186172, -0.037048399448394775, 0.07680730521678925, -0.010969581082463264, -0.03805011883378029, 0.03530169278383255, 0.06721062958240509, -0.02690749056637287, 0.013752234168350697, 0.07853800803422928, 0.004963970743119717, -0.03582505136728287, 0.0681685283780098, 0.040634073317050934, 0.010153154842555523, -0.03717227280139923, 0.053639523684978485, -0.031582318246364594, 0.0009388955659233034, -0.08696892857551575, -0.032106999307870865, 0.07380546629428864, 0.06947565078735352, 0.03402659296989441, 0.06949549913406372, -0.004979375749826431, 0.015400664880871773, -0.023656316101551056, -0.00891176238656044, 0.032773736864328384, 0.03536653146147728, 0.010420470498502254, -0.013317981734871864, 0.050085727125406265, 0.0044414084404706955, -0.050098128616809845, -0.014951424673199654, -0.08594398945569992, 0.011205052956938744, 0.06898043304681778, -0.018328916281461716, -0.017061421647667885, 5.626394976983428e-33, -0.05703287199139595, 0.0020853523164987564, 0.016290312632918358, -0.014971723780035973, -0.056073617190122604, 0.022087808698415756, -0.03650752827525139, -0.0035348746459931135, 0.13500875234603882, 0.06979825347661972, -0.03413965180516243, 0.007061347831040621, -0.11742550134658813, 0.02200167253613472, 0.0029468920547515154, -0.05521886795759201, 0.004384185653179884, -0.022243136540055275, -0.057844966650009155, -0.014906681142747402, -0.06548647582530975, -0.0894092246890068, -0.06196349114179611, 0.018365653231739998, 0.0980834886431694, 0.03983303904533386, 0.004002174828201532, -0.000302073109196499, -0.050561148673295975, -0.004085742402821779, 0.13956351578235626, -0.016437219455838203, -0.06020035594701767, 0.07517493516206741, -0.06875395774841309, -0.014893054962158203, -0.0031710367184132338, 0.13388103246688843, -0.022065287455916405, -0.07147406041622162, 0.053739696741104126, 0.07847820967435837, 0.0945095494389534, -0.002286390634253621, -0.10341967642307281, -0.04881123825907707, -0.10054821521043777, 0.041173581033945084, 0.08534599095582962, 0.02920933999121189, 0.057694751769304276, 0.04433204233646393, -0.008823540061712265, 0.017052894458174706, 0.04716293141245842, 0.025499816983938217, 0.006932323798537254, -0.016538120806217194, -0.0015494866529479623, 0.011766255833208561, -0.0488346666097641, 0.027626650407910347, 0.02378878742456436, 0.015673024579882622, 0.08625353872776031, 0.03770530968904495, -0.0321645624935627, 0.04678950086236, -0.021235870197415352, -0.03575386106967926, -0.022229192778468132, -0.061362966895103455, 0.001650109770707786, 0.04319179058074951, -0.03514173999428749, -0.02103213034570217, 0.059378158301115036, 0.0018287705024704337, -0.052059974521398544, -0.035894349217414856, -0.05897980555891991, 0.03110744059085846, -0.005224485415965319, -0.13074132800102234, -0.09563255310058594, 0.002240039873868227, 0.09319866448640823, 0.06281980872154236, 0.05611824989318848, -0.020867403596639633, 0.04689797759056091, -0.016348928213119507, -0.02319253236055374, 0.022481627762317657, -0.045599564909935, -5.254661418925188e-33, 0.03974476084113121, 0.07241851836442947, 0.031115565448999405, 0.057558074593544006, 0.04156961292028427, 0.04597961902618408, 0.07790426164865494, -0.00820324756205082, 0.09934193640947342, 0.044980499893426895, -0.030845319852232933, 0.1014598086476326, 0.05659103766083717, 0.02802659198641777, 0.02605150267481804, 0.06957731395959854, 0.002638839650899172, -0.023703793063759804, -0.026569299399852753, -0.000649877532850951, -0.09284983575344086, 0.0347464345395565, 0.016577517613768578, -0.05718923732638359, -0.06093185395002365, 0.05378865450620651, 0.033556029200553894, -0.07369875907897949, -0.05285545438528061, -0.07130667567253113, -0.027052391320466995, 0.02508503571152687, -0.007349344901740551, 0.032464202493429184, -0.00734407315030694, -0.11302366852760315, 0.0644451379776001, 0.07082239538431168, -0.04044083133339882, -0.038947172462940216, 0.03324213624000549, 0.019688429310917854, -0.046460844576358795, -0.006424533668905497, -0.11026865988969803, 0.07012028247117996, 0.0976499542593956, -0.08826365321874619, 0.01327576581388712, -0.027071604505181313, 0.04863233119249344, 0.0060481722466647625, -0.025729257613420486, 0.022052636370062828, 0.05888780578970909, 0.1168484091758728, 0.12720005214214325, -0.013362023048102856, -0.12332920730113983, -0.017571160569787025, 0.051309406757354736, 0.11556277424097061, -0.0235158558934927, -0.04339766502380371, -0.024047289043664932, 0.049715034663677216, 0.019341979175806046, 0.00717484625056386, 0.10060383379459381, 0.07371050119400024, -0.04510342329740524, 0.11105761677026749, 0.10929129272699356, -0.03632206842303276, -0.041701752692461014, -0.09086354076862335, 0.01406183373183012, 0.03202178329229355, -0.004311594180762768, -0.014954871498048306, -0.008169992826879025, 0.05367182195186615, -0.05608590692281723, 0.0005562584265135229, 0.0547860786318779, -0.07339907437562943, -0.031985774636268616, -0.008745615370571613, 0.08009423315525055, -0.015597615391016006, 0.022869499400258064, 0.00042229151586070657, 0.015889128670096397, 0.03086790256202221, 0.04633171111345291, -5.091203192364446e-8, -0.030985288321971893, -0.04817930981516838, -0.019638922065496445, 0.020249266177415848, -0.06993803381919861, 0.04221879690885544, 0.03860912472009659, 0.01668669655919075, -0.00026464846450835466, 0.017253762111067772, 0.04005328565835953, 0.013537601567804813, 0.00561283016577363, -0.06530369073152542, 0.003812291193753481, -0.11898297816514969, 0.035319983959198, 0.06077947840094566, -0.01295945979654789, -0.04064427688717842, 0.09987589716911316, -0.016804296523332596, 0.006071519106626511, 0.05982028320431709, 0.01845334656536579, 0.0029399185441434383, 0.022014107555150986, -0.0050565036945044994, 0.021601200103759766, 0.017202103510499, -0.0012380414409562945, 0.06414131820201874, -0.045935869216918945, 0.0009710000595077872, 0.03233754634857178, 0.004353885538876057, -0.005328538361936808, 0.01675676926970482, -0.000615585595369339, 0.09159445762634277, 0.01744077354669571, -0.038155995309352875, -0.04478943347930908, -0.030672933906316757, 0.017194777727127075, -0.03214123472571373, -0.11318339407444, -0.04626331850886345, -0.010255301371216774, 0.07989220321178436, 0.07391653954982758, 0.028057780116796494, 0.05660557374358177, -0.022590285167098045, -0.019489696249365807, 0.012775170616805553, -0.028764111921191216, 0.030978843569755554, -0.051885511726140976, -0.022132480517029762, 0.05186193808913231, 0.004519284702837467, -0.09883791953325272, -0.055718254297971725 ]

{ "pdf_file": "SGU5XQOYWHC2ADXS74XA3FLWFRGL5RDW.pdf", "text": "29440 CFR Ch. I (7±1±99 Edition) § 60.370\nwhere:\nE=emission rate of particulate matter, kg/\nMg (1b/ton) of stone feed.\ncs=concentration of particulate matter,\ng/dscm (g/dscf).\nQsd=volumetric flow rate of effluent gas,\ndscm/hr (dscf/hr).\nP=stone feed rate, Mg/hr (ton/hr).K=conversion factor, 1000 g/kg (453.6 g/lb).\n(2) Method 5 shall be used at nega-\ntive-pressure fabric filters and other\ntypes of control devices and Method 5Dshall be used as positive-pressure fabricfilters to determine the particulatematter concentration (c\ns) and the volu-\nmetric flow rate (Q sd) of the effluent\ngas. The sampling time and sample vol-ume for each run shall be at least 60minutes and 0.90 dscm (31.8 dscf).\n(3) The monitoring device of\n§60.343(d) shall be used to determinethe stone feed rate (P) for each run.\n(4) Method 9 and the procedures in\n§60.11 shall be used to determine opac-ity.\n(c) During the particulate matter\nrun, the owner or operator shall usethe monitoring devices in §60.343(c)(1)and (2) to determine the average pres-sure loss of the gas stream through thescrubber and the average scrubbing liq-uid supply pressure.\n[54 FR 6675, Feb. 14, 1989]\nSubpart KKÐStandards of Per-\nformance for Lead-Acid Bat-tery Manufacturing Plants\nSOURCE : 47 FR 16573, Apr. 16, 1982, unless\notherwise noted.\n§ 60.370 Applicability and designation\nof affected facility.\n(a) The provisions of this subpart are\napplicable to the affected facilities list-ed in paragraph (b) of this section atany lead-acid battery manufacturingplant that produces or has the designcapacity to produce in one day (24hours) batteries containing an amountof lead equal to or greater than 5.9 Mg(6.5 tons).\n(b) The provisions of this subpart are\napplicable to the following affected fa-cilities used in the manufacture oflead-acid storage batteries:\n(1) Grid casting facility.(2) Paste mixing facility.(3) Three-process operation facility.(4) Lead oxide manufacturing facil-\nity.\n(5) Lead reclamation facility.(6) Other lead-emitting operations.(c) Any facility under paragraph (b)\nof this section the construction ormodification of which is commencedafter January 14, 1980, is subject to therequirements of this subpart.\n§ 60.371 Definitions.\nAs used in this subpart, all terms not\ndefined herein shall have the meaninggiven them in the Act and in subpart Aof this part.\n(a) Grid casting facility means the fa-\ncility which includes all lead meltingpots and machines used for casting thegrid used in battery manufacturing.\n(b) Lead-acid battery manufacturing\nplant means any plant that produces a\nstorage battery using lead and leadcompounds for the plates and sulfuricacid for the electrolyte.\n(c) Lead oxide manufacturing facility\nmeans a facility that produces leadoxide from lead, including product re-covery.\n(d) Lead reclamation facility means the\nfacility that remelts lead scrap andcasts it into lead ingots for use in thebattery manufacturing process, andwhich is not a furnace affected undersubpart L of this part.\n(e) Other lead-emitting operation\nmeans any lead-acid battery manufac-turing plant operation from which leademissions are collected and ducted tothe atmosphere and which is not partof a grid casting, lead oxide manufac-turing, lead reclamation, paste mixing,or three-process operation facility, or afurnace affected under subpart L ofthis part.\n(f) Paste mixing facility means the fa-\ncility including lead oxide storage,conveying, weighing, metering, andcharging operations; paste blending,handling, and cooling operations; andplate pasting, takeoff, cooling, and dry-ing operations.\n(g) Three-process operation facility\nmeans the facility including thoseprocesses involved with plate stacking,burning or strap casting, and assemblyof elements into the battery case.\nVerDate 18<JUN>99 00:02 Aug 18, 1999 Jkt 183142 PO 00000 Frm 00294 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\\SGML\\183142T.XXX pfrm04 PsN: 183142T" }

[ 0.005785180721431971, 0.02771640196442604, -0.007803244050592184, 0.03192101791501045, 0.037519171833992004, 0.05860777571797371, 0.09486988931894302, -0.009728750213980675, -0.05171022191643715, 0.04851173609495163, -0.02888844721019268, 0.06245439872145653, -0.003149713622406125, 0.009207525290548801, -0.009654665365815163, 0.047595664858818054, 0.06201397255063057, -0.022517921403050423, -0.06550144404172897, 0.15511702001094818, 0.015329189598560333, 0.03192734345793724, 0.006504010409116745, 0.08702266961336136, -0.04666628688573837, -0.00587955629453063, -0.04052276909351349, 0.00734674884006381, -0.041312750428915024, 0.02917456440627575, 0.009155390784144402, 0.06138625368475914, 0.045426614582538605, 0.07595571130514145, 0.008759054355323315, 0.011124717071652412, 0.10802397131919861, -0.01198542583733797, 0.015210566110908985, -0.040181804448366165, -0.042200397700071335, -0.027455449104309082, -0.017655333504080772, 0.07492358982563019, -0.10403995960950851, -0.009535900317132473, 0.014004471711814404, 0.003080100519582629, -0.01944364793598652, 0.015561922453343868, 0.01734081842005253, 0.032982293516397476, 0.006264704745262861, -0.022521311417222023, 0.014545965008437634, -0.0745244026184082, -0.019892876967787743, -0.047683704644441605, -0.01679493673145771, -0.0009192656143568456, -0.09418418258428574, 0.01732448861002922, 0.0146997831761837, 0.018727188929915428, 0.033932194113731384, -0.033713992685079575, 0.031166015192866325, -0.03976410999894142, 0.0602707713842392, -0.026692422106862068, -0.05662616342306137, 0.08351241797208786, 0.04788221791386604, 0.0030882672872394323, 0.03289070352911949, 0.010995578020811081, 0.046589624136686325, -0.03540293127298355, 0.06213236600160599, -0.04596994072198868, 0.06804876029491425, 0.029756413772702217, -0.028547782450914383, -0.016735130921006203, 0.008429513312876225, -0.022818375378847122, -0.07675065845251083, 0.03387613967061043, -0.024066684767603874, -0.003611106425523758, -0.03475775569677353, 0.0252908393740654, 0.039214834570884705, -0.04754042997956276, -0.07075135409832001, 0.01656675711274147, -0.006013760343194008, -0.015803204849362373, -0.07632806152105331, 0.0630531907081604, 0.07585671544075012, 0.008175468072295189, 0.010336274281144142, -0.0408756360411644, -0.03928406164050102, 0.00910815130919218, 0.04753553122282028, -0.12253359705209732, -0.039212170988321304, -0.042424462735652924, 0.006684118416160345, 0.04066496342420578, -0.03426867723464966, -0.016467729583382607, 0.007825170643627644, 0.07582171261310577, -0.07268810272216797, 0.03243206441402435, 0.06007688492536545, 0.027725854888558388, 0.024253493174910545, -0.0028971575666218996, 0.07897073775529861, -0.006163151003420353, 0.05254890024662018, -0.05924367159605026, -0.008662369102239609, 3.1308076132182496e-33, 0.004453773144632578, 0.02728160284459591, 0.02453942596912384, 0.034471116960048676, 0.06022292375564575, -0.040192171931266785, -0.06085892766714096, -0.041137173771858215, -0.00023904378758743405, 0.09667455404996872, -0.057396627962589264, 0.03214482218027115, 0.11258377134799957, 0.07106997072696686, 0.03921404108405113, -0.02692619524896145, -0.10976951569318771, -0.046918079257011414, -0.005741844419389963, -0.03794325888156891, 0.034138284623622894, -0.05118931084871292, -0.012366948649287224, 0.035435836762189865, 0.11919890344142914, -0.09036577492952347, -0.021867671981453896, 0.03350743651390076, 0.022363845258951187, 0.025815322995185852, -0.008421322330832481, 0.11317456513643265, -0.009788510389626026, -0.012403818778693676, 0.016788989305496216, -0.04849286749958992, 0.030311936512589455, -0.0037388198543339968, -0.06139795482158661, -0.0925794467329979, -0.04977063834667206, 0.07560985535383224, 0.038481615483760834, 0.035555850714445114, 0.043283890932798386, -0.11633382737636566, -0.016362404450774193, 0.006544085685163736, -0.05323921889066696, 0.03686262294650078, 0.025789612904191017, 0.014941980130970478, 0.06190278008580208, -0.07646925002336502, -0.06413301825523376, -0.0797184631228447, 0.03376280888915062, 0.047173481434583664, -0.03348449617624283, -0.07113482058048248, -0.04075814411044121, -0.0271606482565403, -0.07202750444412231, 0.013769492506980896, 0.0321744941174984, 0.05135593190789223, -0.015226941555738449, -0.01744583249092102, 0.0056283059529960155, 0.02378799021244049, -0.014884443022310734, 0.011257047764956951, -0.018569432199001312, -0.0503053143620491, -0.12667050957679749, -0.014997847378253937, 0.06671766191720963, 0.001846680068410933, 0.05549057200551033, -0.0096121309325099, -0.005747480783611536, -0.0008487676968798041, -0.009571220725774765, 0.004245981574058533, -0.017134683206677437, -0.07712984830141068, 0.014883814379572868, 0.0051506501622498035, 0.04433141276240349, -0.012971972115337849, -0.040743887424468994, -0.026076361536979675, 0.07632122933864594, 0.02034877985715866, -0.004434756934642792, -4.7088610247391684e-33, 0.004434634931385517, 0.022570965811610222, -0.03890739381313324, -0.03794073686003685, 0.008648152463138103, 0.000308617833070457, 0.026537926867604256, -0.11410734802484512, -0.06436936557292938, -0.11836158484220505, -0.09683490544557571, 0.022700272500514984, -0.016104036942124367, 0.05015736445784569, 0.036399513483047485, -0.05513584986329079, -0.03790375590324402, 0.043148260563611984, -0.035098060965538025, -0.03414854034781456, 0.08579794317483902, 0.08664199709892273, -0.009446382522583008, 0.05125631019473076, 0.015892095863819122, -0.07099311798810959, 0.034327272325754166, 0.002830617129802704, 0.06103818118572235, -0.07085426151752472, 0.06431212276220322, -0.01927676983177662, -0.03652935475111008, 0.04488328471779823, -0.026575099676847458, 0.04320300742983818, 0.07658219337463379, -0.0032076016068458557, -0.08623389154672623, -0.0431792177259922, 0.030330562964081764, 0.028142521157860756, -0.004290666431188583, -0.012523853220045567, -0.004728601314127445, -0.007983517833054066, -0.009974054992198944, -0.037495195865631104, -0.09114272147417068, -0.017099153250455856, -0.13031919300556183, -0.11175019294023514, -0.07219582051038742, 0.0051826718263328075, 0.0809711366891861, 0.015495755709707737, 0.02893698215484619, -0.08176711201667786, 0.049168188124895096, -0.04276326298713684, 0.005699618719518185, 0.08836347609758377, -0.05436289682984352, 0.005184140056371689, 0.0323287695646286, -0.060175128281116486, -0.06400003284215927, 0.056084807962179184, 0.042346835136413574, 0.07193984091281891, 0.0023433698806911707, -0.04689779877662659, -0.02007954567670822, 0.02909104712307453, -0.06362481415271759, -0.01848658174276352, 0.0741088017821312, 0.017332250252366066, -0.05104876682162285, 0.06644003093242645, 0.032732754945755005, -0.10546113550662994, -0.0583501011133194, 0.02260085940361023, -0.007707576733082533, 0.10042734444141388, 0.10108165442943573, 0.006629406474530697, -0.02262919954955578, -0.02110859751701355, -0.05819426104426384, -0.03700787201523781, -0.037636395543813705, 0.0041942172683775425, -0.0014353303704410791, -6.100136573650161e-8, 0.05588899180293083, 0.04326088726520538, -0.08893806487321854, 0.004771004896610975, -0.024794993922114372, -0.056389063596725464, 0.013764938339591026, -0.1356746107339859, -0.08739271759986877, -0.0231686532497406, 0.17057552933692932, -0.03326612338423729, -0.024102814495563507, -0.02476518042385578, 0.047234196215867996, -0.001461682957597077, -0.07064766436815262, -0.0046644690446555614, -0.08978905528783798, 0.008490133099257946, -0.01542298961430788, -0.014924508519470692, -0.07058384269475937, 0.0659007728099823, -0.03694365918636322, 0.08389483392238617, -0.03550126031041145, -0.024579549208283424, 0.009147079661488533, 0.1317773461341858, -0.08900441229343414, 0.04609908163547516, -0.06584945321083069, -0.007446154952049255, 0.017955338582396507, 0.026545073837041855, -0.0041556102223694324, -0.03409155458211899, 0.052173443138599396, -0.009910838678479195, 0.017359839752316475, 0.057760633528232574, 0.025537719950079918, 0.031115971505641937, 0.08597134053707123, -0.0027052806690335274, -0.011667098850011826, 0.021327830851078033, 0.06497567147016525, -0.06035934016108513, 0.033152565360069275, -0.052426405251026154, -0.032584547996520996, 0.07689318805932999, -0.031073039397597313, 0.1216835156083107, -0.006538202986121178, -0.0028637575451284647, 0.05749478191137314, -0.06724470108747482, 0.03434388339519501, -0.012627122923731804, -0.07984831929206848, -0.00264024268835783 ]

{ "pdf_file": "SH2IQH724IFKG2K3GQ7RCDJ6Q7IJQLGE.pdf", "text": "119 STAT. 3679 CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS—DEC. 22, 2005\nof security for the Nation’s flying public, and are a key factor\nin restoring confidence in the Nation’s air transportation system;\nWhereas volunteer pilots in the Federal flight deck officer program\ndevote personal time and finances to maintain a high standardof proficiency in the use of firearms and techniques for addressing\nemergencies in flight; and\nWhereas volunteer pilots in the Federal flight deck officer program,\nat great personal risk and with no compensation or recognition,are dedicated to the protection of the flight deck, thereby pro-viding an additional layer of protection to the aircraft, passengers,and cargo from acts of terrorism, such as the possible use ofthe aircraft as a weapon of mass destruction against peopleon the ground: Now, therefore, be it\nResolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) ,\nThat Congress—\n(1) recognizes that volunteer pilots in the Federal flight\ndeck officer program are the consummate quiet professionalsand embody what is best in our national character;\n(2) applauds volunteer pilots in the Federal flight deck\nofficer program for taking a stand against those who wouldseek to harm the United States through acts of terrorism inthe air; and\n(3) expresses appreciation to volunteer pilots in the Federal\nflight deck officer program on behalf of all citizens of theUnited States for the ongoing contribution of these pilots tothe security of the Nation and its air transportation system.\nAgreed to December 22, 2005.\nRUSSIAN FEDERATION—INTELLECTUAL\nPROPERTY RIGHTS PROTECTION\nWhereas the protection of intellectual property is critical to the\nNation’s economic competitiveness in the 21st century;\nWhereas Russia remains on the Special 301 Priority Watch List\ncompiled by the United States Trade Representative (USTR),and the Congress is gravely concerned about the failure of theRussian Federation to live up to international standards in theprotection of intellectual property rights, a core American asset;\nWhereas the Congress wants to ensure that the Russian Federation\nredoubles its efforts to adopt and enforce aggressive laws, policies,and practices in the fight against piracy and counterfeiting;\nWhereas the Congress is particularly concerned that the Russian\nFederation is, in the words of Senate Concurrent Resolution 28,a place where ‘‘piracy that is open and notorious is permittedto operate without meaningful hindrance from the government’’;\nWhereas, according to USTR, enforcement of intellectual property\nrights in Russia ‘‘remains weak and caused substantial lossesfor the U.S. copyright, trademark, and patent industries in thelast year. Piracy in all copyright sectors continues unabated,and the U.S. copyright industry estimated losses of $1.7 billionin 2004.’’;Dec. 22, 2005\n[H. Con. Res. 230]\nVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:23 Oct 26, 2006 Jkt 039194 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 9796 Sfmt 6581 C:\\STATUTES\\2005\\39194PT3.002 APPS10 PsN: 39194P T3 119 STAT. 3680 CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS—DEC. 22, 2005\nWhereas the Russian Federation must understand that failure to\nadequately protect and enforce intellectual property rights willhave political and economic ramifications for its relationship withthe United States;\nWhereas accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) rep-\nresents an agreement to conform one’s practices to the rule oflaw, and to international standards in the WTO Agreement onTrade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS);\nWhereas notwithstanding some recent legislative improvements,\nRussia’s regime to protect intellectual property rights does notconform with TRIPS standards;\nWhereas the United States can ill afford deterioration of the world\ntrading system by permitting the entry of a country into theWTO that has not demonstrated its willingness and ability toconform its practices to the requirements of the TRIPS; and\nWhereas the leaders of the G–8, including President Putin of the\nRussian Federation, recently pledged to reduce intellectual prop-erty piracy through more effective enforcement: Now, therefore,be itResolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) ,\nThat it is the sense of the Congress that—\n(1) the Russian Federation should provide adequate and\neffective protection of intellectual property rights, or it riskslosing its eligibility to participate in the Generalized Systemof Preferences (GSP) program; and\n(2) as part of its effort to accede to the World Trade\nOrganization, the Russian Federation must ensure that intellec-tual property is securely protected in law and in practice,by demonstrating that the country is willing and able to meetits international obligations in this respect.\nAgreed to December 22, 2005.\nS. 1281—ENROLLMENT CORRECTION\nResolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) ,\nThat in the enrollment of the bill (S. 1281) to authorize appropria-tions for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration forscience, aeronautics, exploration, exploration capabilities, and theInspector General, and for other purposes, for fiscal years 2006,2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010, the Secretary of the Senate shallcorrect the title so as to read: ‘‘An Act to authorize the programsof the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.’’.\nAgreed to December 22, 2005.\nADJOURNMENT—HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\nAND SENATE\nResolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) ,\nThat when the House adjourns on any legislative day from Sunday,Dec. 22, 2005\n[H. Con. Res. 326]Dec. 22, 2005\n[H. Con. Res. 324]\nVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:23 Oct 26, 2006 Jkt 039194 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 9796 Sfmt 6581 C:\\STATUTES\\2005\\39194PT3.002 APPS10 PsN: 39194P T3" }

[ 0.026803212240338326, -0.05457247048616409, 0.02204080857336521, 0.05672496184706688, 0.014454489573836327, 0.041710689663887024, 0.0025221954565495253, 0.019390473142266273, -0.01714768260717392, 0.06830032914876938, -0.003448870964348316, 0.0166203361004591, -0.06451106071472168, -0.04086184501647949, -0.04501364007592201, -0.02342730574309826, 0.03435245901346207, -0.013370555825531483, -0.006243764888495207, 0.08463045954704285, 0.10222694277763367, -0.056301530450582504, -0.01284415926784277, -0.030479881912469864, 0.08408191055059433, 0.026061177253723145, -0.06714081764221191, -0.04005320370197296, 0.014902114868164062, -0.005831951275467873, -0.006508119869977236, 0.024750495329499245, -0.012019253335893154, -0.04431019350886345, 0.06919578462839127, -0.00990134384483099, 0.05891624093055725, 0.09546436369419098, 0.0285648163408041, -0.0258925873786211, -0.03639620542526245, -0.0029749241657555103, 0.014341099187731743, -0.10550547391176224, -0.05915922299027443, 0.006174275651574135, 0.02454516477882862, 0.02751307375729084, -0.0276770181953907, 0.08328033238649368, 0.03952809050679207, 0.09214276820421219, 0.008823703043162823, 0.027478227391839027, 0.0980430319905281, 0.004938983358442783, -0.021538730710744858, -0.0011523804860189557, -0.0893481969833374, 0.032107409089803696, -0.044787537306547165, 0.03783842921257019, 0.02032768726348877, -0.04059420898556709, -0.0026124122086912394, 0.08342199772596359, -0.0670495554804802, -0.051226284354925156, -0.03659029304981232, -0.06878110021352768, -0.0031612361781299114, -0.005824069958180189, -0.01898936741054058, -0.15617704391479492, 0.003717989893630147, -0.05608542263507843, 0.1534997671842575, 0.08009152114391327, 0.04238412529230118, -0.08129967749118805, 0.04431644454598427, 0.06049969047307968, -0.0351393036544323, 0.001954594859853387, -0.03071262128651142, -0.006022451911121607, 0.005437827203422785, -0.014080879278481007, -0.0845046266913414, 0.01601235568523407, 0.08138974010944366, 0.06876756995916367, 0.05808517336845398, -0.037830453366041183, -0.005198649596422911, -0.03770781308412552, -0.016270320862531662, 0.01615884341299534, 0.07142958045005798, 0.05384993925690651, 0.06442360579967499, 0.02836553007364273, 0.0018602320924401283, -0.02072295732796192, 0.04605693742632866, -0.036659058183431625, 0.015412679873406887, -0.023163100704550743, 0.038069188594818115, 0.03728059306740761, 0.02375849336385727, 0.02913017012178898, -0.00721887219697237, -0.0073498510755598545, 0.014081493020057678, -0.029543180018663406, -0.038402311503887177, -0.029999535530805588, 0.13579872250556946, 0.02687019854784012, 0.011447995901107788, 0.0491473488509655, -0.047428298741579056, 0.01273487787693739, -0.027270006015896797, -0.014695322141051292, -0.056690435856580734, 2.943031023211028e-33, 0.06096847355365753, -0.02600421942770481, 0.06610101461410522, -0.07274395227432251, -0.07719139009714127, 0.007394979242235422, 0.029184335842728615, 0.023884382098913193, 0.01809633895754814, -0.026262210682034492, -0.02524513565003872, 0.06107952445745468, 0.007854930125176907, -0.010563395917415619, 0.05260350555181503, -0.13521867990493774, -0.06383293867111206, -0.0017187969060614705, 0.043878767639398575, 0.023113759234547615, -0.028034385293722153, -0.10576412826776505, 0.06445027142763138, -0.02014978416264057, 0.05142916738986969, -0.029665058478713036, -0.050521742552518845, 0.08254238218069077, 0.006047584116458893, 0.0036280322819948196, 0.06706022471189499, -0.017636902630329132, 0.07854519784450531, -0.0017313838470727205, 0.00028170712175779045, -0.04505256935954094, 0.11714732646942139, 0.08357031643390656, -0.012496545910835266, -0.08045873790979385, -0.03368058800697327, 0.04140094667673111, 0.07816892117261887, 0.010319560766220093, -0.11369827389717102, -0.03833349049091339, -0.0030498874839395285, 0.0007895121816545725, -0.028847554698586464, 0.0024401459377259016, 0.02260916866362095, 0.0021479458082467318, -0.04525923356413841, -0.0693296492099762, -0.0962267741560936, -0.024872109293937683, 0.028814047574996948, -0.04382289946079254, 0.04047507792711258, 0.05051422119140625, 0.0031168535351753235, -0.0006974218413233757, 0.026090342551469803, 0.012488765642046928, 0.0023507708683609962, 0.09908369183540344, 0.03894126042723656, 0.05716291442513466, -0.00877263955771923, 0.027419162914156914, -0.08671078085899353, -0.03039524517953396, -0.009483165107667446, 0.027604805305600166, 0.10887689888477325, -0.005416425876319408, 0.015793252736330032, -0.005004120524972677, 0.021685607731342316, 0.015153428539633751, 0.023158470168709755, -0.03161942586302757, 0.022946352139115334, -0.08434130251407623, 0.016914959996938705, 0.029190290719270706, 0.016135064885020256, -0.004836524836719036, 0.05649969354271889, -0.08615393191576004, -0.01309605035930872, 0.01647644117474556, 0.02644157037138939, 0.03376822918653488, 0.022108199074864388, -3.822145595637592e-33, -0.01271756086498499, 0.0997282937169075, -0.06742498278617859, -0.037845369428396225, -0.10614712536334991, 0.026970718055963516, 0.020399373024702072, -0.02452436089515686, -0.047995876520872116, -0.0052526528015732765, -0.011360728181898594, -0.0041186632588505745, -0.01921599544584751, 0.11144835501909256, -0.029933476820588112, -0.06879619508981705, 0.0445307120680809, -0.05287034064531326, 0.04174453765153885, -0.07172904908657074, -0.002935636555776, 0.037078775465488434, -0.0008274784777313471, 0.013792027719318867, -0.05647401511669159, 0.03526392951607704, -0.0986592173576355, -0.030462443828582764, 0.035375311970710754, -0.040727321058511734, -0.015547300688922405, 0.010771814733743668, -0.05992851033806801, 0.025275029242038727, -0.04574401304125786, -0.05667159706354141, -0.02006714791059494, -0.10615158826112747, -0.020353414118289948, 0.0014088875614106655, 0.06635378301143646, -0.029065625742077827, -0.05888412520289421, 0.02993759512901306, 0.017145032063126564, 0.02701626345515251, -0.06234317272901535, 0.013210728764533997, 0.02557949721813202, 0.02214980497956276, -0.04578594118356705, -0.0398273691534996, -0.11908890306949615, 0.032208822667598724, -0.01292981207370758, 0.05037544295191765, 0.12261013686656952, -0.004960618447512388, 0.028563054278492928, -0.02138221450150013, -0.10204367339611053, 0.05686048045754433, -0.05556168034672737, -0.05956386402249336, -0.002265671268105507, 0.00043643818935379386, 0.02633918821811676, -0.09080134332180023, 0.10841869562864304, -0.08390172570943832, 0.0010969225550070405, 0.028876228258013725, -0.039470430463552475, -0.07715204358100891, -0.06813040375709534, 0.1011316254734993, 0.0348341204226017, 0.008079266175627708, 0.0013970892177894711, 0.05170745030045509, 0.03236892819404602, -0.030108120292425156, 0.021526727825403214, -0.07157573848962784, -0.04873194918036461, -0.0015974256675690413, 0.053134869784116745, -0.03624008223414421, -0.08693179488182068, 0.0839136391878128, -0.09787649661302567, 0.036185093224048615, -0.0114171477034688, 0.09285038709640503, 0.031624067574739456, -4.590434699025536e-8, 0.003624578472226858, 0.03986681252717972, -0.08958127349615097, 0.0470433384180069, 0.0423460379242897, -0.04164949432015419, 0.02354973554611206, 0.038507409393787384, -0.041735704988241196, -0.0793609470129013, 0.04297624155879021, 0.06368803977966309, -0.028141876682639122, -0.04686032235622406, -0.08603931963443756, 0.0359458327293396, -0.043054983019828796, -0.06440252810716629, 0.045054174959659576, -0.04236176609992981, 0.057120975106954575, -0.009537399746477604, -0.0807642713189125, 0.006994619499891996, -0.015484192408621311, -0.07665427774190903, 0.0034887180663645267, 0.11614475399255753, 0.00906944926828146, 0.014533847570419312, -0.004062185995280743, 0.06786592304706573, -0.030961215496063232, -0.07620615512132645, 0.03143059462308884, 0.022187519818544388, -0.052533604204654694, 0.002253270475193858, 0.07193294167518616, -0.0021266473922878504, 0.0590985082089901, -0.01253067422658205, -0.04117467999458313, -0.012744839303195477, 0.0009148098761215806, -0.017352018505334854, -0.03899545967578888, -0.09821050614118576, 0.08611690253019333, -0.12487993389368057, 0.04324498772621155, 0.006318034138530493, 0.00798970740288496, 0.05373372510075569, 0.028683874756097794, -0.043098077178001404, -0.0687713548541069, 0.018634630367159843, -0.08220651745796204, 0.00008430071466136724, -0.013877741992473602, -0.041814710944890976, 0.009950379841029644, 0.03388049453496933 ]

{ "pdf_file": "DAMU2TVQKZEDZ6ZJN7NZBERHFU6I6ZZG.pdf", "text": " \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n 11 September 2011 \nGovernment Receipts and Expenditures \nSecond Quarter of 2011 \nNET GOVERNMENT saving, the difference be­\ntween current receipts and current expenditures \nof the federal government and state and local govern­\nments, was –$1,313.0 billion in the second quarter of \n2011, decreasing $54.7 billion from –$1,258.3 billion in the first quarter of 2011.\n Net federal government saving was –$1,264.4 bil­\nlion in the second quarter, decreasing $63.3 billion from –$1,201.1 billion in the first quarter (see page \n12). Current receipts decelerated, while current expen­\nditures turned up in the second quarter. \nNet state and local government saving was –$48.6 \nbillion in the second quarter, increasing $8.6 billion from –$57.2 billion in the first quarter (see page 13). \nCurrent receipts turned up, while current expenditures \naccelerated. \nNet borrowing was $1,529.3 billion in the second \nquarter, increasing $62.8 billion from $1,466.5 billion in the first quarter. Federal government net borrowing was $1,435.6 billion in the second quarter, increasing \n$82.8 billion from $1,352.8 billion in the first quarter. \nState and local government net borrowing was $93.7 billion, decreasing $20.0 billion from $113.7 billion in \nthe first quarter. \n“Net lending or net borrowing (–)” is an alternative \nmeasure of the government fiscal position. Net bor­rowing is the financing requirement of the government \nsector, and it is derived as net government saving plus the consumption of fixed capital and net capital trans­\nfers received less gross investment and net purchases of \nnonproduced assets. \nTable 1. Net Government Saving and Net Lending or Net Borrowing \n[Billions of dollars, seasonally adjusted at annual rates] \nLevel Change from preceding quarter \n2011 2010 2011 \nII III IV I II \nCurrent receipts ................................ \nCurrent expenditures . ........... ............ \nNet government saving .................. \nFederal ......... .................. ........ ....... \nState and local............................... \nNet lending or net borrowing (–) ... \nFederal ......... .................. ........ ....... \nState and local...... .......... ............... 4,157.0 \n5,470.0 \n–1,313.0 \n–1,264.4 \n–48.6 \n–1,529.3 –1,435.6 \n–93.7 88.4 \n45.2 \n43.3 \n20.3 \n23.0 \n109.3 \n78.4 \n30.9 9.6 \n69.4 \n–59.9 –29.6 \n–30.3 \n–55.1 \n–28.4 \n–26.7 81.0 \n16.5 \n64.5 \n86.2 \n–21.7 \n88.4 \n106.4 \n–18.0 51.0 \n105.7 \n–54.7 \n–63.3 \n8.6 \n–62.8 –82.8 \n20.0 Char Char t t 1. 1. Go Government Fiscal Pvernment Fiscal P osition osition\n \n2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 \n2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 \nNOTE. All estimates are seasonally adjusted at annual rates. \nU.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Current Receipts, Current Expenditures, and Net Government Saving \nCurrent receipts Current expenditures \nNet government saving Billions of dollars \nTotal Receipts,Total Expenditures, and Net Lending or Borrowing \nTotal receipts Total expenditures \nNet lending or borrowing Billions of dollars Federal State and local Net Saving \nBillions of dollars\n Net Lending or Net Borrowing \nFederal State and local Billions of dollars 6,000 \n4,000 \n2,000 \n0 \n–2,000 \n200 \n0 \n–200 \n–400 –600 –800 \n–1,000 –1,200 –1,400 \n500 \n0 \n–500 \n–1,000 \n–1,500 –2,000 6,000 \n4,000 2,000 \n0 \n–2,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 \n2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 \nRaymen Labella prepared this article. \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n 12 Government Receipt s and Expenditure s September 2011 \nFederal Government \nTable 2. Federal Government Current Receipts and Expenditures \n[Billions of dollars, seasonal ly adjusted at annual rates] \nLevel Change from preceding quarter \n2011 2010 2011 \nII III IV I II \nCurrent receipts ................................ 2,564.8 67.6 –4.9 57.4 36.9 \nCurrent tax receipts ................................... 1,538.3 55.8 –5.0 140.5 25.0 \nPersonal current taxes. ........... .......... ...... 1,070.9 23.6 15.5 119.0 24.1 \nT axes on production and imports ........... 112.7 1.6 –1.7 4.8 6.0 \nT axes on corporate income .................... 339.8 30.8 –19.8 16.3 –5.6 \nT axes from the rest of the world ............. 14.9 –0.2 0.9 0.4 0.6 \nContributions for government social \ninsurance................................................ 905.9 5.6 2.4 –83.3 11.3 \nIncome receipts on assets......................... 54.4 3.0 –0.3 –0.4 –0.2 \nCurrent transfer receipts ............................ 67.4 3.0 –1.9 –1.6 –0.7 \nCurrent surplus of government enterprises –1.2 0.1 –0.1 2.2 1.5 \nCurrent expenditures ........................ 3,829.1 47.3 24.7 –28.8 100.1 \nConsumption expenditures ........................ 1,077.1 10.6 –7.0 –0.5 18.0 \nNational defense .................................... 723.3 11.5 –10.4 –1.7 22.3 \nNondefense ....... .......... ........... .......... ...... 353.8 –0.8 3.3 1.2 –4.3 \nCurrent transfer payments ......................... 2,346.8 42.9 18.8 –38.0 34.1 \nGovernment social benefits.................... 1,754.8 20.8 14.7 –6.2 13.3 \nT o persons........................................... 1,738.0 20.3 15.3 –6.2 12.9 \nT o the rest of the world........................ 16.8 0.4 –0.6 0.0 0.4 \nOther current transfer payments............. 592.0 22.1 4.0 –31.7 20.8 \nGrants-in-aid to state and local \ngovernments .................................... 527.7 17.9 2.8 –30.4 13.2 \nT o the rest of the world........................ 64.3 4.3 1.2 –1.3 7.5 \nInterest payments ...................................... 342.8 –7.1 10.3 8.6 44.8 \nSubsidies ................................................... 62.4 0.7 2.8 1.0 3.2 \nLess: Wage accruals less disbursements 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNet federal government saving .............. –1,264.4 20.3 –29.6 86.2 –63.3 \nSocial insurance funds .............................. –284.9 –9.6 –10.1 15.4 4.3 \nOther.......................................................... –979.4 29.8 –19.4 70.7 –67.5 \nAddenda: \nTotal receipts ........................................ 2,570.4 64.8 –15.3 53.9 41.0 \nCurrent receipts .................................. 2,564.8 67.6 –4.9 57.4 36.9 \nCapital transfer receipts ...................... 5.7 –2.6 –10.5 –3.5 4.2 \nTotal expenditures ................................ 4,006.0 –13.6 13.1 –52.5 123.8 \nCurrent expenditures... .......... ........ ...... 3,829.1 47.3 24.7 –28.8 100.1 \nGross government in vestment ............ 160.0 2.3 3.9 –13.8 –0.9 \nCapital transfer payments ................... 153.8 –64.6 –12.0 –7.7 27.1 \nNet purchases of nonproduced assets –0.2 2.6 –1.7 0.2 –0.5 \nLess: Consumption of fixed capital ..... 136.8 1.1 1.8 2.3 2.2 \nNet lending or net borrowing (–) ........... –1,435.6 78.4 –28.4 106.4 –82.8 Personal current taxes decelerated in the second quar­\nter because of decelerations in both withheld and non-withheld income taxes. \nTaxes on corporate income turned down as a result of \na decrease in domestic corporate profits before tax. \nContributions for government social insurance turned \nup, reflecting an upturn in contributions for social se­\ncurity. First-quarter contributions were lowered by the \nreduction in the social security contribution rate. \nNational defense expenditures turned up in the sec­\nond quarter, reflecting upturns in durable goods and \nservices. \nGovernment social benefits to persons turned up as a \nresult of an acceleration in social security benefits, and a smaller decrease in unemployment benefits. Refund­\nable tax credits remained unchanged after decreasing. \nGrants-in-aid to state and local governments turned \nup, reflecting a smaller decrease in Medicaid grants, an \nupturn in welfare and social grants, and an accelera­\ntion in education grants. \nInterest payments accelerated, reflecting an accelera­\ntion in inflation expense payments on Treasury Infla­\ntion-Protected Securities. \nGross government investment decreased less, reflect­\ning an upturn in defense equipment and software. \nEstimates of federal government current receipts, current \nexpenditures, and net federal government saving are based on data from the federal budget, from the Monthly Treasury \nStatement and other reports from the Department of the \nTreasury, and from other federal government agencies. T otal receipts, total expenditures, and net lending or net \nborrowing, which are alternative measures of the federal \nfiscal position, are based on these same sources. \nQuarterly and annual estimates are published monthly in \nNIPA table 3.2. Detailed annual estimates of these transac­tions by component are published annually in NIPA tables 3.4–3.8, 3.12, and 3.13. Detailed quarterly estimates are available in underlying NIPA tables at \nwww.bea.gov/ \nnational/nipaweb/nipa_underlying/Index.asp .\n Each year, BEA translates the information in the federal \nbudget into a NIPA framework.1 For a historical time series \nof these estimates, see NIPA table 3.18B, which is scheduled to be published in the October 2011 \nSURVEY . \n1. See Mark S. Ludwick and Andrea L. Cook, “NIPA Translation of the \nFiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget,” S URVEY OF CURRENT BUSINESS 91 (March \n2011): 12–21. Federal Government EstimatesFederal Government Estimates \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n 13 September 2011 SURVEY OF CURRENT BUSINESS \nState and Local Government \nTable 3. State and Local Government Current Receipts and Expenditures \n[Billions of dollars, seasonal ly adjusted at annual rates] \nLevel Change from preceding quarter \n2011 2010 2011 \nII III IV I II \nCurrent receipts ................................... 2,119.9 38.8 17.2 –6.8 27.4 \nCurrent tax receipts ...................................... 1,366.1 20.4 14.0 23.6 14.7 \nPersonal current taxes ... .................... ....... 323.6 13.9 12.6 5.9 4.6 \nT axes on production and imports .............. 989.2 6.8 8.2 17.1 8.5 \nT axes on corporate income. ...................... 53.4 –0.3 –6.8 0.6 1.7 \nContributions for government social \ninsurance .................................................. 21.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 \nIncome receipts on assets............................ 89.1 –1.0 –0.2 0.3 –1.5 \nCurrent transfer receipts............................... 656.4 19.8 3.7 –29.7 14.3 \nFederal grants-in-aid ...... .................... ....... 527.7 17.9 2.8 –30.4 13.2 \nOther ......................................................... 128.7 1.9 0.9 0.7 1.1 \nCurrent surplus of government enterprises –13.3 –0.5 –0.5 –1.3 –0.4 \nCurrent expenditures .......................... 2,168.6 15.8 47.4 14.9 18.9 \nConsumption expenditures........................... 1,483.1 –2.9 11.2 21.6 11.4 \nGovernment social benefits.......................... 570.6 17.0 35.1 –7.0 7.0 \nInterest payments......................................... 114.5 2.2 1.8 0.5 0.8 \nSubsidies...................................................... 0.4 –0.5 –0.6 –0.1 –0.5 \nLess: Wage accruals less disbursements .... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 \nNet state and local government saving .... –48.6 23.0 –30.3 –21.7 8.6 \nSocial insurance funds ................................. 2.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 \nOther ............................................................ –51.0 22.9 –30.4 –21.9 8.5 \nAddenda: \nTotal receipts ........................................... 2,195.9 48.8 12.9 –18.2 31.1 \nCurrent receipts ..................................... 2,119.9 38.8 17.2 –6.8 27.4 \nCapital transfer receipts ......................... 75.9 10.0 –4.3 –11.4 3.6 \nTotal expenditures .................................. 2,289.6 18.0 39.5 –0.2 11.1 \nCurrent expenditures ... ......... .......... ....... 2,168.6 15.8 47.4 14.9 18.9 \nGross government investment ............... 318.1 4.0 –6.4 –13.1 –4.7 \nCapital transfer payments ...................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ \nNet purchases of nonproduced assets 15.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 \nLess: Consumption of fixed capital ........ 212.6 1.9 1.8 2.4 3.4 \nNet lending or net borrowing (–) ............... –93.7 30.9 –26.7 –18.0 20.0 Personal current taxes decelerated as a result of a de­\nceleration in income taxes. \nTaxes on production and imports decelerated as a re­\nsult of decelerations in business license taxes and sev­\nerance taxes. \nFederal grants-in-aid to state and local governments \nturned up, reflecting a smaller decrease in Medicaid grants, an upturn in welfare and social grants, and an acceleration in education grants. \nConsumption expenditures decelerated because of a \ndeceleration in expenditures for nondurable goods. \nGovernment social benefits turned up as a result of an \nupturn in Medicaid benefits. \nC a p i t a l tra n s f e r r e c e i p t s t u rn e d u p a s a r e s u l t o f u p ­\nturns in grants for highways and for transit and rail­\nroads. \nThe estimates of state and local government current re­\nceipts and expenditures and total receipts and expenditures \nare mainly based on compilations of data for state and local \ngovernment finances. The Census Bureau produces the pri­mary source data: the census of governments that is con­\nducted in years that end in a 2 or a 7 and the Government \nFinances series of surveys for the other years. In addition, \nother sources of Census Bureau data are from the Quarterly \nSummary of State and Local Government Tax Revenue and \nthe monthly Value of Construction Put in Place . Data \nsources from the Bureau of Labor Statistics include the \nQuarterly Census of Employment and Wages and the \nEmployment Cost Index. \nQuarterly and annual estimates are available monthly in \nNIPA table 3.3. Detailed annual estimates of state and local government transactions by component are available annually in NIPA tables 3.4–3.8, 3.12, and 3.13. Detailed quarterly estimates are available in underlying NIPA \ntables at \nwww.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/nipa_underlying/ \nIndex.asp . For a historical time series of reconciliations of \nthe NIPA estimates with the Census Bureau data from \nGovernment Finances , see NIPA table 3.19. \nBEA also prepares annual estimates of receipts and \nexpenditures of state governments and of local governments.\n1 These estimates are available annually in \nNIPA table 3.20 (state government receipts and expen­\nditures) and in NIPA table 3.21 (local government receipts \nand expenditures); see “Newly Available NIPA Tables” in \nthe October 2010 SURVEY . \n1. Bruce E. Baker, “Receipts and Expenditures of State Governments and \nof Local Governments,” S URVEY 85 (October 2005): 5–10. Estimates of State and Local Government Receipts and Expenditures " }

[ 0.03785032778978348, 0.059747323393821716, -0.055110666900873184, 0.03977225720882416, 0.009969545528292656, 0.08978716284036636, -0.010825945995748043, 0.010475452989339828, 0.01904529519379139, 0.07205318659543991, 0.028060786426067352, 0.02188737690448761, -0.00964610930532217, -0.045833367854356766, 0.026318812742829323, -0.07701029628515244, -0.05111600086092949, -0.014700105413794518, 0.015724610537290573, 0.031711023300886154, 0.09773650020360947, 0.009836756624281406, -0.06793150305747986, 0.05150124430656433, 0.02530190907418728, -0.014990556053817272, -0.0823143720626831, -0.005991354584693909, -0.0946139246225357, -0.004328597337007523, -0.006527821533381939, 0.017992613837122917, 0.07536341995000839, 0.02865748107433319, 0.029354345053434372, -0.02023210935294628, 0.03303917124867439, 0.039239853620529175, -0.054271966218948364, 0.005579627119004726, -0.12655934691429138, 0.035320792347192764, 0.029575742781162262, 0.028201956301927567, -0.11847008019685745, 0.02347976714372635, 0.03782450780272484, -0.054968297481536865, -0.07942598313093185, 0.054691165685653687, 0.007702827453613281, 0.055624451488256454, 0.0770304873585701, 0.09299662709236145, 0.013987483456730843, 0.009536762721836567, 0.07121505588293076, -0.052261050790548325, -0.03668905422091484, -0.00428976071998477, -0.06785932928323746, -0.06390094012022018, -0.011393208988010883, -0.018025735393166542, 0.00430163461714983, 0.053955309092998505, 0.04508040100336075, -0.08503495901823044, -0.05857091397047043, -0.04619627445936203, -0.09301837533712387, -0.01315961591899395, -0.06107903644442558, 0.014283068478107452, 0.0002899422834161669, 0.01408963743597269, 0.05205317586660385, 0.12007135152816772, 0.0914752334356308, -0.11295700818300247, 0.04658573493361473, -0.02414240501821041, -0.015031951479613781, 0.00402537826448679, 0.006304343696683645, 0.05320611223578453, -0.02980136312544346, 0.000834434584248811, 0.02138758823275566, 0.0004651110211852938, 0.07696056365966797, 0.10594599694013596, 0.020679401233792305, -0.10186281055212021, -0.04698270559310913, -0.04842567816376686, 0.01637302152812481, 0.010910720564424992, 0.016848614439368248, 0.02927500754594803, 0.0378282405436039, -0.00861396174877882, 0.05357860401272774, -0.032569654285907745, 0.01364230178296566, -0.042887602001428604, 0.047863755375146866, -0.011392572894692421, -0.0393778532743454, -0.04643091559410095, 0.012361114844679832, -0.005269068758934736, -0.004883031360805035, 0.012302813120186329, 0.008777840994298458, 0.02005903422832489, -0.1077561229467392, 0.047886136919260025, 0.06764610856771469, 0.04400845244526863, 0.04902690276503563, 0.06895571202039719, -0.02379482425749302, 0.05376984179019928, -0.02975369244813919, -0.03903010115027428, -0.08410182595252991, 7.905036409438707e-33, -0.03190228343009949, 0.04159346595406532, -0.01728014647960663, -0.013399447314441204, 0.029778406023979187, -0.08874879777431488, 0.039029575884342194, -0.050785262137651443, 0.07977990061044693, -0.031162938103079796, 0.03237677365541458, 0.015084215439856052, 0.03677259385585785, -0.0035853604786098003, 0.028761018067598343, 0.024394940584897995, -0.05373458191752434, 0.05724138766527176, -0.028127474710345268, -0.015287348069250584, 0.09131260216236115, -0.05934394150972366, 0.01775556243956089, -0.019106021150946617, 0.07375099509954453, 0.05573481321334839, -0.06449101120233536, 0.022126253694295883, -0.053127091377973557, 0.017940890043973923, -0.005705537740141153, -0.00039760489016771317, 0.08135028928518295, -0.041297778487205505, 0.022273840382695198, -0.08341518044471741, 0.06495977938175201, 0.012581142596900463, -0.017265336588025093, -0.030085233971476555, 0.00484883738681674, 0.08378825336694717, 0.09323029965162277, 0.048090387135744095, -0.028124243021011353, -0.09292134642601013, 0.08676739037036896, 0.07731571793556213, 0.12927992641925812, 0.07878387719392776, -0.008257531560957432, -0.004950335714966059, -0.007033155765384436, -0.00799364410340786, -0.03956083953380585, -0.02208455093204975, 0.010133926756680012, -0.09260182082653046, -0.02053483948111534, -0.04880817234516144, 0.06506310403347015, 0.05891925096511841, -0.03885899484157562, -0.09185813367366791, -0.047074999660253525, 0.03262713551521301, 0.004816629458218813, 0.07531598210334778, 0.06810802966356277, 0.03822223097085953, 0.0022476923186331987, -0.03895668312907219, 0.0492275170981884, 0.015321524813771248, 0.05241753160953522, 0.042916350066661835, 0.03177741914987564, 0.05450129508972168, -0.04563498497009277, -0.012202301062643528, -0.02572726085782051, -0.06368707120418549, -0.034371450543403625, 0.013696767389774323, 0.1052195131778717, 0.008993173949420452, 0.08026505261659622, 0.08279063552618027, -0.018289240077137947, 0.029628535732626915, 0.06293939054012299, -0.05192609131336212, 0.07359710335731506, 0.06700827181339264, -0.034422509372234344, -8.815406825640659e-33, -0.04849610850214958, 0.07649033516645432, 0.007491666357964277, -0.027548793703317642, 0.044158272445201874, 0.05570526421070099, -0.01971956342458725, -0.15004178881645203, 0.0008889288292266428, -0.09610210359096527, -0.04758690670132637, -0.04749791696667671, -0.0014256701106205583, -0.011126128025352955, 0.025962548330426216, -0.002786798169836402, 0.008932935073971748, -0.06846331804990768, -0.06838423758745193, -0.04634837433695793, -0.052242521196603775, 0.06261692941188812, 0.012577775865793228, 0.049929529428482056, 0.022166328504681587, -0.020847853273153305, -0.022176343947649002, -0.01996387168765068, 0.018942879512906075, -0.03442315012216568, -0.08001331239938736, -0.06482205539941788, -0.06154387816786766, 0.03906147554516792, -0.0636616125702858, -0.11244747042655945, -0.042747218161821365, -0.07458283752202988, -0.006697691045701504, 0.09732361137866974, 0.06614759564399719, -0.024821458384394646, -0.045837875455617905, 0.09532810747623444, -0.02401239424943924, -0.023026898503303528, -0.03722745552659035, -0.07442540675401688, 0.0022585676051676273, -0.03322497755289078, -0.007765584625303745, -0.01645069569349289, -0.12140219658613205, 0.009327773004770279, -0.06812100857496262, 0.01911863125860691, 0.04054301232099533, 0.01833321899175644, -0.02280656062066555, -0.028837446123361588, -0.04219815507531166, 0.05262542515993118, 0.022179419174790382, -0.022249162197113037, 0.046869996935129166, -0.08685554563999176, 0.007053193636238575, -0.07825611531734467, 0.0612538643181324, -0.010069935582578182, 0.038346659392118454, -0.07717173546552658, -0.03656923025846481, 0.025439362972974777, -0.02243012562394142, 0.07787352800369263, -0.003477063262835145, -0.033190395683050156, -0.01450655609369278, 0.05237864330410957, -0.0198656115680933, 0.017487909644842148, -0.040267884731292725, -0.006908923387527466, -0.011537284590303898, -0.009594346396625042, -0.024018030613660812, -0.04006675258278847, -0.026929624378681183, -0.00027786212740466, -0.007781296037137508, -0.06061283126473427, -0.0005340660572983325, 0.07458710670471191, 0.047373704612255096, -6.302392563384274e-8, 0.10605714470148087, 0.02190818265080452, -0.04133572801947594, -0.038576483726501465, 0.04604608565568924, -0.036499228328466415, 0.031695619225502014, 0.011620125733315945, -0.04399050772190094, 0.004320296458899975, 0.07628156989812851, 0.05415825545787811, 0.02300875633955002, -0.05729924142360687, -0.013444910757243633, 0.0024145885836333036, -0.0428415983915329, 0.02877679094672203, -0.06571608036756516, -0.074327252805233, -0.08487948775291443, -0.04658407345414162, -0.04871749132871628, 0.03308967128396034, -0.04036307707428932, 0.012606830336153507, -0.041670117527246475, 0.10705302655696869, 0.055731888860464096, 0.031857967376708984, -0.006584922783076763, 0.038952894508838654, -0.07127642631530762, -0.06620635837316513, -0.007713365834206343, -0.008028536103665829, -0.01966964639723301, -0.008636647835373878, 0.059637706726789474, 0.0596739761531353, 0.041047126054763794, -0.03163523226976395, -0.08974356949329376, 0.10403832793235779, 0.0091334143653512, 0.004582567606121302, -0.04059206321835518, -0.06587836891412735, -0.02837085910141468, -0.09674330055713654, 0.08300986886024475, -0.02707560546696186, 0.005283697042614222, 0.07858072966337204, -0.0660780742764473, 0.03126166760921478, -0.025664957240223885, -0.010278960689902306, -0.06997909396886826, -0.018535299226641655, 0.0776698887348175, 0.05645393580198288, 0.0004978482611477375, -0.01623540185391903 ]

{ "pdf_file": "46KXLWATPXX7EE6CIIN3H4KUPVN3RX75.pdf", "text": "California Public Employees’ Retirement System \nwww.calpers.ca.gov \n C \nExecutive Office \nP.O. Box 942701 \nSacramento, CA 94229-2701 \n(916) 795-3825 \n \n \n \n \n To: T he Honorable Denise Ducheny, Chair \nSenate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Joint Committee on Legislative Budget State Capitol, Room 5019 Sacramento, CA 95814 The Honorable Michael Machado, Chair Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee #4 State Capitol, Room 5066 Sacramento, CA 95814 The Honorable John Laird, Chair Assembly Budget Committee State Capitol, Room 6026 Sacramento, CA 95814 The Honorable Juan Arambula, Chair Assembly Budget Subcommittee #4 State Capitol, Room 2141 Sacramento, CA 95814 \n \n \nSubject: Budget Act of 2008 Control Language – CalP ERS Budget and Expenditure \nReport through First Quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 2008-09. \n \nIn accordance with control language in cluded in the Budget Act of 2008, \nItem 1900-015-0830 (1)(c) , California Public Employees’ Retirement System \n(CalPERS) respectfully submits its FY 2008-09 first quarter report as approved \nby the CalPERS’ Board of Administrati on at the December 17, 2008, meeting. \n The enclosed report includes the following items for FY 2008-09: \n \n• Budget and Expenditure Summary by Function and Division \n• Summary Charts by Function \n• Graphical Display of Budget and Expenditure by Function \n• Position Summary \n• Projected and Actual In vestment Expenditures \n• Directed Brokerage Commissions and Expenditures \n• CalPERS Headquarters Building Account Budget/Income/Expenditure \nSummary \n• Expenditures by Fund Source Summary \n \n Page 2 \n \n \n \n If you or your staff have any questions or concerns with this report, \nplease contact me at (916) 795-3500. Sincerely, KENNETH W. MARZION Interim Chief Executive Officer Enclosure \n \ncc: Brian Annis, Consultant \nSenate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee #4 Adam Dondro, Consultant Assembly Budget Committee Assembly Budget Subcommittee #4 \n \nRosario Marin, Secretary State and Consumer Services Agency Michael Cohen, Director State Administration Legislative Analyst’s Office Michael Havey, Chief Division of Accounting and Reporting State Controller’s Office Diana Ducay, Program Budget Manager Department of Finance Office of the Legislative Counsel Attn: Indexing Division Jody Martin, Consultant Joint Legislative Budget Committee \n \n " }

[ -0.050058070570230484, -0.011809125542640686, 0.000859489431604743, 0.001671888749115169, -0.04483230039477348, 0.07690151780843735, -0.008421101607382298, 0.018612409010529518, -0.03033347800374031, -0.006621855776757002, -0.12140543013811111, 0.03646574914455414, 0.0427907258272171, -0.061749979853630066, -0.006049694959074259, -0.0018907120684161782, 0.033988431096076965, -0.06605056673288345, -0.07453324645757675, 0.07435277849435806, -0.005465605296194553, 0.030295906588435173, -0.03843279182910919, 0.05503781884908676, 0.04771795868873596, -0.020405761897563934, -0.050328079611063004, -0.10600129514932632, 0.0008846945711411536, 0.00682097626850009, 0.11283412575721741, -0.003944475669413805, 0.07551916688680649, -0.028681181371212006, -0.014487089589238167, 0.04777804762125015, 0.014651515521109104, -0.008823562413454056, -0.11300575733184814, 0.0686153769493103, 0.013683554716408253, 0.09078354388475418, 0.04077405855059624, 0.06740213930606842, -0.024976924061775208, -0.05339746177196503, -0.0036585053894668818, 0.028435083106160164, 0.006705986801534891, 0.061429109424352646, -0.09445437788963318, -0.019602470099925995, 0.019066695123910904, 0.08120493590831757, 0.006065468303859234, 0.020648548379540443, 0.05032305419445038, -0.12838126718997955, -0.03942618519067764, -0.01590391807258129, -0.0782398208975792, -0.011371120810508728, 0.06528565287590027, 0.017701877281069756, 0.007333928719162941, 0.02904786355793476, -0.0035775986034423113, -0.030333474278450012, -0.046311113983392715, 0.0123635558411479, 0.03674175217747688, -0.06158977374434471, 0.0038359216414391994, -0.010081176646053791, 0.09438379108905792, 0.006780263036489487, 0.05140350013971329, 0.08650676161050797, 0.06592466682195663, -0.015001306310296059, -0.029273930937051773, -0.10050053149461746, -0.0032458181958645582, -0.012852925807237625, -0.010221828706562519, -0.014567716978490353, -0.03434348106384277, -0.07156410813331604, 0.0173238143324852, -0.05844821780920029, 0.03337626904249191, -0.011515739373862743, -0.019466355443000793, -0.09923378378152847, -0.031300731003284454, 0.0589771531522274, -0.05294743925333023, -0.0752338394522667, -0.02649606205523014, 0.03273071348667145, 0.012593423016369343, 0.09131813049316406, 0.09035009890794754, -0.08681987226009369, -0.05967618152499199, -0.08439739048480988, 0.07269309461116791, 0.11148714274168015, -0.007854930125176907, -0.03616035729646683, 0.052723150700330734, 0.008185432292521, 0.08745446801185608, -0.02897067740559578, -0.07846526801586151, 0.028548024594783783, 0.029670707881450653, -0.10341820865869522, 0.04619498923420906, 0.06527400761842728, 0.017439909279346466, 0.05365801230072975, -0.07128210365772247, -0.04945514351129532, 0.02350357361137867, -0.01792275719344616, -0.106363445520401, 1.2600516084032694e-33, 0.05930130183696747, -0.004359016194939613, 0.07042831182479858, -0.08122161775827408, 0.011265729553997517, -0.048309847712516785, -0.025594934821128845, -0.056612495332956314, 0.01811808906495571, -0.033047936856746674, 0.010399176739156246, 0.04983004555106163, -0.0010055673774331808, 0.028044085949659348, -0.039292339235544205, -0.08107145130634308, -0.08793008327484131, 0.06456714123487473, -0.04316200315952301, 0.08835799247026443, -0.00639927526935935, -0.07118814438581467, 0.03043581172823906, -0.020905109122395515, 0.04921779781579971, 0.0034594321623444557, 0.03078947402536869, 0.09156697243452072, 0.0433582067489624, -0.015074080787599087, 0.04199142009019852, 0.12094105035066605, 0.0007069170824252069, -0.0590905100107193, -0.05610530450940132, -0.009497780352830887, -0.03597945719957352, 0.0779043659567833, -0.029551992192864418, -0.038790345191955566, 0.00831660721451044, 0.06654639542102814, 0.016652541235089302, 0.025137601420283318, 0.08702867478132248, -0.07034178823232651, 0.07761823385953903, -0.03461112454533577, -0.014849767088890076, -0.03383356332778931, -0.0024202221538871527, -0.02097219228744507, -0.05391821265220642, -0.022725369781255722, -0.01961604878306389, -0.04987993463873863, 0.02862107753753662, 0.0005072650383226573, 0.012578489258885384, -0.02310771867632866, 0.02200615592300892, -0.05958206579089165, 0.0221024751663208, 0.013335074298083782, -0.03400256857275963, 0.0402686707675457, 0.05067736282944679, 0.03641459718346596, -0.028688829392194748, 0.03724917396903038, 0.02767617627978325, -0.012442541308701038, -0.014183426275849342, 0.06183061748743057, -0.06646225601434708, 0.041769515722990036, -0.002012711949646473, -0.049559272825717926, 0.06887739896774292, -0.027232453227043152, -0.03275362029671669, -0.005290170665830374, 0.06930302083492279, 0.06918052583932877, 0.07332499325275421, 0.001072168117389083, 0.0246412493288517, 0.0467698909342289, -0.04429357498884201, -0.07740392535924911, -0.03682144731283188, 0.03780830651521683, 0.016884921118617058, 0.019691281020641327, 0.044061001390218735, -3.672741733016018e-33, -0.025032350793480873, 0.04797612130641937, -0.025721535086631775, -0.014114475809037685, -0.01512870006263256, -0.04674827307462692, -0.03808976709842682, -0.022707553580403328, 0.13726945221424103, -0.00868221465498209, -0.015334803611040115, 0.049591634422540665, -0.014108160510659218, -0.0008132411749102175, -0.02937215194106102, -0.04446554183959961, 0.08954758942127228, -0.09377986192703247, -0.03170624002814293, -0.07611893862485886, 0.014123623259365559, 0.12063547968864441, 0.009430035017430782, 0.03669341281056404, -0.019268473610281944, 0.06195974349975586, -0.06324638426303864, 0.039260078221559525, 0.04021638631820679, -0.0773535892367363, -0.05500100553035736, -0.04824223741889, -0.05586334690451622, 0.017087489366531372, 0.0011067319428548217, 0.016515672206878662, 0.018488464877009392, 0.009919787757098675, -0.007651871535927057, -0.022775545716285706, 0.1419675499200821, -0.03410226106643677, -0.03972151130437851, 0.05429931730031967, 0.04389452561736107, -0.0599246472120285, -0.05814547836780548, -0.06488601863384247, 0.027113264426589012, 0.0008317140163853765, -0.1099574863910675, -0.0888851061463356, 0.0029717187862843275, 0.06237567216157913, -0.05380382388830185, 0.020080257207155228, -0.02459765039384365, -0.025759823620319366, 0.061259496957063675, -0.015479527413845062, -0.03285348787903786, 0.07998431473970413, -0.0583476684987545, -0.03617219999432564, -0.050680018961429596, -0.027448706328868866, 0.036521561443805695, -0.08734986931085587, 0.051135916262865067, 0.044102832674980164, 0.008734998293220997, -0.01922966167330742, -0.032163675874471664, 0.01915362849831581, -0.013927957974374294, 0.09369702637195587, 0.01287108100950718, 0.0029407741967588663, -0.0515473298728466, 0.02914176695048809, 0.03306746110320091, -0.06410684436559677, -0.03596704080700874, -0.02985243685543537, 0.013934729620814323, -0.06438649445772171, -0.003026056569069624, -0.06971601396799088, -0.028128715232014656, 0.07904636114835739, -0.13090719282627106, -0.026948468759655952, -0.016084421426057816, 0.016464684158563614, -0.052220892161130905, -5.63078366155878e-8, 0.03383190557360649, 0.03485726937651634, -0.09703264385461807, 0.010412200354039669, 0.00524301640689373, -0.1353921741247177, -0.1136409342288971, 0.004104883875697851, -0.02044544741511345, 0.029235903173685074, 0.10330424457788467, 0.1043916717171669, 0.022114316001534462, -0.024096589535474777, 0.028816238045692444, 0.03296538442373276, -0.08764150738716125, -0.028253164142370224, -0.03576967492699623, -0.028706422075629234, -0.03878422826528549, -0.007894649170339108, -0.032014600932598114, 0.00967565830796957, 0.012943534180521965, 0.05113719403743744, 0.024351447820663452, 0.0917273536324501, -0.016596753150224686, 0.025245312601327896, 0.01966371014714241, 0.021370094269514084, 0.012663389556109905, -0.008971556089818478, 0.02325538918375969, -0.08098314702510834, 0.01482300367206335, -0.029271919280290604, 0.11061401665210724, -0.012067797593772411, 0.06137898564338684, 0.026601742953062057, -0.03231373801827431, 0.017642591148614883, -0.0033921864815056324, -0.03147335350513458, -0.09165364503860474, 0.03756237402558327, 0.008054280653595924, -0.06112641468644142, 0.0015732572646811604, -0.0023242689203470945, 0.05668273940682411, 0.0019495227606967092, -0.02565130405128002, 0.03214173763990402, 0.01937742345035076, -0.04260197654366493, -0.01962781324982643, 0.0045634242706000805, 0.05104181542992592, -0.07677935063838959, 0.027271436527371407, 0.01571820117533207 ]

{ "pdf_file": "JPJ5MCDTMBPXA7YEZNO5KXTSWXWYNDW5.pdf", "text": "Bachus Sponsors Proposal to Help Increase Hospital Reimbursements\n \nWASHINGTON, Friday, June 30 —— The House last night passed a resolution sponsored\nby U.S. Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-CA) and co-sponsored by U.S. Reps. Heather Wilson\n(R-NM) and Spencer Bachus (R-AL) calling on Congress to increase Medicare\nreimbursement funding for hospitals as soon as a mid-year estimate of the nation's\nbudget surplus is completed. \nThat estimate is expected to show the surplus will be at least $1 trillion higher over the next 10\nyears than budget forecasters had predicted. The legislation is designed to increase Medicare\npayments to hospitals, nursing homes and other health care providers suffering from\nhigher-than-expected reductions in Medicare reimbursements under the 1997 Balanced Budget\nAct. \n\"Our hospitals in Alabama are hurting,\" said Bachus. \"70 percent are operating in the red and\n14 are predicted to run out of money this year and could close. Improving the financial health of\nour hospitals is crucial to maintaining the quality of health care we've all come to expect. \n\"There is a bottom line to this discussion: when you or a loved one is seriously ill, only the very\nbest medical care is good enough,\" Bachus said in a speech on the floor of the House. \"We\nmust not fail to provide sufficient funding to assure such care is reasonably available to all.\nAmerican medical care is an honest and undeniable bargain by any measure. Its true cost is not\nmeasured in dollars and cents alone, but also in the health and well-being of all our people. \n\"According to the Congressional Budget Office, the actual reductions brought about by the\nBalanced Budget Act – and by restrictive interpretations of that act by HCFA – are $124 billion\nmore than Congress voted for. Our fiscal overachievements and HCFA's overzealousness are\nhaving unintentional and disproportionately negative effects on our health care delivery system,\"\nsaid Bachus. \nCongress acted last year to restore $16 billion in funding for hospitals, nursing homes and other\nproviders in legislation co-sponsored by Bachus. \n– 30 – \nRemarks of Congressman Spencer Bachus during consideration of House Resolution\n535 \nMr. Speaker, \nAchieving a balanced budget has long been a Republican economic objective. And it is a good\none. We can credit our current, strong, vibrant economy to our fiscal discipline. But damaging\nour healthcare system was never our intent in passing the Balanced Budget Act. It was the\nintent of Congress to slow the growth of Medicare to a manageable 5%...however in 1999 it was\nactually negative 1%! \n 1 / 2 Bachus Sponsors Proposal to Help Increase Hospital Reimbursements\nThe Congressional Budget office now reports that Medicare reductions achieved through the\nBalanced Budget Act are $124 Billion (that's billion with a B) larger than Congress actually\nvoted for. We must recognize this shortfall, and remedy it immediately. \nOur hospitals are experiencing increasingly smaller profit margins, and we should all realize that\nthis threatens to diminish the quality of care they provide. Credible sources report these margins\nare currently at their lowest point in years. And some valid, responsible authorities are\nprojecting that within four years over half of our nations' hospitals will actually be losing money. \nIn my home state, studies are projecting that 70% of Alabama's hospitals will be running in the\nred by the end of this year, and several could close. We cannot stand back, let this happen and\ncall it an unintended consequence. We owe our constituents more than that. \nOur challenge is to find a balance: responsibly controlling government spending on one hand,\nand sufficiently funding our hospitals on the other hand. \nAmerica can boast the finest healthcare system in the world. There have been incredible\nadvances in medicine in recent years with real hope of miraculous achievement in defeating\nillness, pain and suffering. \nJust this week, the magnificent accomplishment of mapping the human genome was formally\nannounced- bringing with it the promise of major breakthroughs in preventative medicine. \nBut all of these new are marvelous developments come with a hefty price tag. Our hospitals\nmust have sound and reliable financial support to be able to offer us these new miracles.\nMaking sure that our financial support is available is a mandate we in Congress cannot\nsidestep. We should be true to our obligations. \nThere is a bottom line to this discussion. When your loved one is seriously ill, only the very best\nmedical care is good enough. We must not fail to provide sufficient funding to assure such care\nis reasonably available to all. \nAmerican medical care is an honest and undeniable bargain by any measure. Its true cost is not\nmeasured in dollars and cents alone, but also in the health and well-being of all our people. \n 2 / 2" }

[ -0.041218578815460205, 0.013960431329905987, -0.00003473872857284732, -0.033184126019477844, -0.0018705136608332396, 0.05693265050649643, -0.015947822481393814, 0.054322823882102966, -0.022667331621050835, 0.02873878926038742, -0.019242018461227417, 0.10091233253479004, 0.009575081057846546, 0.09447741508483887, -0.02823486365377903, 0.05414934456348419, -0.0008576744585298002, 0.003600735915824771, -0.013592828996479511, 0.09714547544717789, 0.008907083421945572, 0.019252700731158257, 0.05855837091803551, -0.018899163231253624, -0.04476715996861458, -0.010850634425878525, -0.04149376600980759, -0.05096401646733284, -0.02790159359574318, 0.041737716645002365, -0.036900248378515244, 0.015812551602721214, -0.08032751083374023, 0.03412008285522461, 0.009683879092335701, -0.03814560920000076, 0.09630564600229263, -0.04114522784948349, 0.05989516153931618, 0.005805071908980608, -0.03151671215891838, -0.033457569777965546, -0.020032120868563652, 0.09878850728273392, -0.05806600674986839, 0.014152027666568756, -0.027356421574950218, 0.028006592765450478, -0.1609642058610916, -0.002824364695698023, -0.006979688070714474, 0.019197076559066772, 0.036572713404893875, 0.038784295320510864, 0.05792264640331268, -0.021210484206676483, -0.01731201261281967, -0.024997593834996223, -0.02689732424914837, -0.030975019559264183, -0.08628910779953003, -0.014634343795478344, -0.042661894112825394, 0.001304788631387055, -0.05173593759536743, 0.05153282359242439, 0.023528987541794777, -0.07999937981367111, -0.01615862548351288, 0.04205980524420738, -0.03800274431705475, 0.005547369364649057, -0.03440123423933983, -0.013272925280034542, -0.012924009934067726, -0.005511230789124966, 0.0078809205442667, 0.077878437936306, 0.008681636303663254, -0.114664725959301, 0.04143741726875305, 0.003910065162926912, 0.026670560240745544, -0.052303068339824677, 0.05422307550907135, -0.11291855573654175, 0.015496092848479748, -0.006689795292913914, -0.013833604753017426, 0.044393282383680344, -0.029709922149777412, 0.024148723110556602, 0.0691387876868248, -0.011131349951028824, -0.026662426069378853, 0.03811582922935486, 0.004466367419809103, 0.046481672674417496, 0.018464088439941406, 0.07889970391988754, 0.04160834848880768, 0.03162281960248947, -0.11942160129547119, -0.0007605510763823986, -0.06442644447088242, -0.032160963863134384, 0.025934668257832527, -0.06939497590065002, -0.04330086335539818, -0.02864941582083702, -0.08966487646102905, 0.005023725796490908, -0.024600831791758537, -0.047202903777360916, -0.01912117563188076, 0.007065880578011274, 0.026514943689107895, 0.056872423738241196, 0.08088596910238266, 0.011654496192932129, 0.009200094267725945, -0.04505978152155876, -0.03887147456407547, 0.030392007902264595, 0.028116267174482346, -0.05555311590433121, -0.03070744313299656, 5.8853240563749304e-33, 0.023720471188426018, -0.03201597183942795, -0.08056560158729553, -0.027078993618488312, 0.015305246226489544, 0.07357540726661682, -0.017780384048819542, -0.04324251413345337, -0.003141033696010709, 0.05236906558275223, -0.024119943380355835, 0.003084257710725069, 0.02731907181441784, -0.002728082472458482, -0.09818372875452042, 0.013169799000024796, -0.03499745577573776, 0.1151188388466835, -0.015461036935448647, -0.06038406118750572, 0.06646355241537094, -0.01568315178155899, 0.04183617979288101, 0.06188231334090233, 0.06549937278032303, 0.05364716798067093, -0.03547285869717598, 0.031997159123420715, 0.04714156314730644, 0.004107186570763588, 0.02470574714243412, 0.040166836231946945, 0.027262667194008827, 0.021021133288741112, 0.02347455359995365, 0.021733198314905167, 0.04400036484003067, 0.021455056965351105, -0.0015169517137110233, -0.011842864565551281, 0.06606265902519226, 0.0452984943985939, -0.025690549984574318, -0.023815924301743507, 0.14984822273254395, 0.017582444474101067, 0.000818248838186264, 0.011230324395000935, 0.05178239941596985, -0.032823704183101654, 0.005551896058022976, 0.031093869358301163, -0.025214318186044693, 0.025945624336600304, -0.045626867562532425, -0.034950222820043564, -0.03966209664940834, 0.07905521243810654, -0.025303693488240242, -0.01714032143354416, 0.04617805406451225, 0.07216072082519531, -0.03164176270365715, -0.04759492352604866, -0.07724571973085403, 0.026908542960882187, -0.1112334281206131, -0.010546090081334114, 0.047977298498153687, -0.07086531817913055, -0.04225344955921173, 0.016216706484556198, -0.019440365955233574, -0.016972504556179047, 0.009087285958230495, -0.015358519740402699, 0.08899672329425812, -0.006719344295561314, 0.03284979611635208, -0.08765806257724762, -0.14314179122447968, 0.05855710804462433, 0.0713408961892128, 0.11348792165517807, -0.011879750527441502, -0.09091003239154816, -0.012404120527207851, 0.11257074028253555, 0.041439350694417953, 0.039249446243047714, -0.03031136468052864, -0.030369024723768234, 0.05735253170132637, 0.04876948148012161, 0.04431433975696564, -6.665238844206594e-33, -0.02237929217517376, -0.03380316123366356, -0.06195075064897537, 0.017009368166327477, 0.015835871919989586, -0.03637547418475151, -0.022430630400776863, -0.0426432266831398, 0.07317405194044113, -0.08807457238435745, 0.012574845924973488, -0.09833808988332748, 0.012735669501125813, 0.05324648693203926, -0.03148236125707626, -0.0043305205181241035, -0.014715650118887424, 0.017465000972151756, -0.05338606983423233, 0.03780048340559006, 0.053476933389902115, 0.08064264804124832, 0.016212530434131622, 0.07601147145032883, 0.00767864054068923, 0.020178809762001038, 0.1825021505355835, -0.06021413579583168, 0.00040944485226646066, -0.024203922599554062, -0.07576829195022583, -0.00196783896535635, -0.07691233605146408, 0.11287181824445724, -0.03308862820267677, -0.049275703728199005, 0.030452771112322807, -0.06041416525840759, -0.011027731001377106, -0.02307167463004589, 0.023542318493127823, 0.0564451590180397, -0.06985065340995789, 0.057114798575639725, -0.0638110563158989, 0.001918801455758512, -0.013757818378508091, -0.02953169494867325, -0.09662094712257385, -0.06188192963600159, -0.02067999728024006, 0.009700403548777103, -0.04555031657218933, -0.09171173721551895, 0.018973372876644135, -0.01711171865463257, -0.04918774589896202, -0.05046886205673218, 0.07750793546438217, -0.06572099030017853, 0.010021157562732697, 0.1327158361673355, -0.03869030252099037, -0.006116444244980812, 0.0421266071498394, 0.004402549471706152, -0.02605997398495674, 0.03459697216749191, 0.09368539601564407, 0.08812796324491501, -0.01448217686265707, -0.06269701570272446, -0.1012689545750618, 0.03580453246831894, 0.13776828348636627, 0.05875939875841141, -0.009306483902037144, -0.05811407044529915, -0.01770292967557907, 0.04626970738172531, -0.09156165271997452, -0.015350370667874813, -0.05149493366479874, -0.004039523657411337, 0.029562460258603096, 0.07774379104375839, -0.00016199283709283918, -0.0017018485814332962, 0.04827547073364258, 0.030016960576176643, -0.039653562009334564, -0.04687725380063057, -0.018630100414156914, 0.06356817483901978, 0.03933374583721161, -6.78307827683966e-8, 0.049595050513744354, 0.019611956551671028, -0.0418224036693573, 0.0795084685087204, -0.026877406984567642, -0.08004914969205856, -0.01632513478398323, 0.014619738794863224, -0.06315534561872482, -0.00673756655305624, 0.08995520323514938, 0.040310006588697433, -0.05076334998011589, -0.04396698996424675, 0.023507915437221527, -0.04962813854217529, -0.057645637542009354, 0.01988818123936653, -0.09098049253225327, -0.031353771686553955, -0.13764868676662445, 0.024394746869802475, -0.00129523198120296, -0.014781049452722073, 0.036154698580503464, 0.006499971728771925, -0.03518390655517578, 0.07523951679468155, 0.0027434832882136106, 0.028779158368706703, 0.0036417243536561728, 0.022090276703238487, -0.12188888341188431, -0.06974361091852188, -0.0411512516438961, -0.028566844761371613, -0.017667673528194427, -0.014316007494926453, 0.05230407416820526, 0.00898332241922617, 0.04867854341864586, 0.033821944147348404, 0.037268731743097305, 0.054811492562294006, 0.03391538932919502, -0.019153891131281853, -0.08668200671672821, 0.0002610823721624911, 0.04461346194148064, -0.04911336302757263, 0.004104850348085165, -0.038598570972681046, -0.03624432533979416, -0.010461892001330853, 0.001247899723239243, 0.1318737268447876, 0.03456108272075653, -0.012056835927069187, -0.02600046992301941, -0.00650836480781436, -0.03721963241696358, 0.01928546279668808, -0.006300588604062796, -0.06458710134029388 ]

{ "pdf_file": "XZZRO7J6EAUYML2MRAZ6Y3PH5ZHQPGIL.pdf", "text": "SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES \nONE HUNDRED FIRST CONGRESS \nFIRST SESSION { Convened January 3, 1989 \nAdjourned November 22, 1989 \nConvened January 2 3, 1990 \nSECOND SESSION { \nEXECUTIVE CALENDAR \nWednesday, September 19, 1990 \nPREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF WALTER J.STEWART, \nSECRETARY OF THE SENATE \nBy Gerald A. Hackett, Executive Clerk 1 \nTREATIES \nCalendar Treaty Subject Reported No. Doc. No. Bv \n11 EX. B., Two Related Protocols to the Convention for Jun 28 90 Reported 95-1 the Unification of Certain Rules Relating favorably by Mr. Pell, \nto International Carriage by Air, as Committee on Foreign \nAmended {Montreal Aviation Protocols Nos. Relations, with a \n3 and 4). resolution of advice and \nconsent to ratification \nwith certain conditions \n{Printed report-Ex. Rept \n101-21 together with \nminority views). \n12 100-20 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Jul 19, 90 Reported \nInhuman or Degrading Treatment or favorably by Mr. Pell, \nPunishment. Committee on Foreign \nRelations, with a \nresolution of advice and \nconsent to ratification \nwith reservations, \nunderstandings and \ndeclarations. \nAug 30, 90 Printed report \nfiled (Ex. Rept 101-30) \ntogether with additional \nviews. \n21 EX. Treaty with the Union of Soviet Socialist Sep 14 90 Reported favorably \nN(A), Republics on the Limitation of Underground by Mr. Pell, Committee on \n94-2 Nuclear Weapon Tests, with a Protocol Foreign Relations, with a \nsigned in Washington on June l, 1990. resolution of advice and \n(Protocol to this treaty is included in consent to ratification \nTreaty Doc. 101-19.) with declarations. Printed \nreport {Ex. Rept 101-31). \n22 EX. Treaty with the Union of Soviet Socialist Sep 14 90 Reported favorably \nN(B), Republics on Underground Nuclear by Mr. Pell, Committee on \n94-2 Explosions for Peaceful Purposes, with a Foreign Relations, with a \nProtocol signed in Washington on June 1. resolution of advice and \n1990. (Protocol to this treaty is included consent to ratification. \nin Treaty Doc. 101-19.) Printed report (Ex. Rept \n101-31). 2 \nNOMINATIONS \nCalendar M~e Nominee, Office, And Predeceswr Reported \n* \n* No. No. By \nDEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY \n944 1370 Bert W. Corneby, of New York, to be Aug 3, 90 Mr. Riegle, \nSuperintendent of the Mint of the United Committee on Banking, \nStates at West Point, New York, vice Housing, and Urban Affairs, \nClifford M. Barber, resigned. without printed report. \nNATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION \n970 1435-1 W. Glenn Campbell, of California, to be a Sep 12, 90 Mr. Kennedy, \nMember of the National Science Board, Committee on Labor and \nNational Science Foundation for the Human Resources, without \nremainder of the term expiring May 10, printed report. \n1994. vice D. Allan Bromlev resil!t1ed. \n*Signifies nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly \nconstituted committee of the Senate. " }

[ -0.05180247128009796, -0.03280199319124222, 0.06015725061297417, 0.05145617946982384, -0.04431140422821045, -0.035883620381355286, 0.02419528365135193, -0.01408733706921339, -0.05051370710134506, -0.09450840204954147, -0.0599670335650444, 0.07321655005216599, -0.023509463295340538, -0.009396101348102093, -0.015333474613726139, 0.050547875463962555, 0.04749958589673042, -0.07328350096940994, 0.025773150846362114, -0.04749831184744835, 0.05510023608803749, -0.04893505573272705, 0.05418910086154938, -0.0071940659545362, 0.08608424663543701, 0.052229829132556915, -0.05574331432580948, -0.0070839920081198215, 0.003378362162038684, 0.02119290642440319, -0.01109427772462368, 0.030231434851884842, -0.008406569249927998, -0.0489143505692482, 0.09726616740226746, 0.10482466965913773, -0.001514009083621204, 0.05319826304912567, 0.06771394610404968, 0.04176107048988342, -0.032006148248910904, -0.1292841136455536, 0.011823092587292194, -0.001972064608708024, -0.04644525423645973, -0.011596123687922955, 0.08789317309856415, -0.02149832621216774, 0.04282904416322708, -0.04167967289686203, 0.02390100248157978, 0.03474787622690201, 0.06681325286626816, -0.07448733597993851, 0.06493806093931198, 0.005036886781454086, 0.040711600333452225, -0.05426113307476044, 0.017227793112397194, 0.04476245120167732, -0.006174886133521795, -0.038675181567668915, -0.022115139290690422, 0.02969788946211338, -0.045531727373600006, -0.011540772393345833, 0.011835125274956226, 0.0047908565029501915, -0.06269002705812454, -0.14198224246501923, 0.04959854483604431, -0.0024291963782161474, -0.0183070320636034, -0.04619782790541649, 0.014222980476915836, -0.0401034913957119, 0.13327112793922424, 0.0851249024271965, 0.07825810462236404, -0.022672539576888084, 0.036518730223178864, 0.0034024480264633894, -0.007410761434584856, -0.10947183519601822, -0.029335826635360718, 0.03578165918588638, -0.003243384649977088, -0.033590320497751236, 0.02452819049358368, 0.02030334062874317, -0.06291057169437408, -0.09900811314582825, 0.003382141003385186, 0.03249427303671837, 0.03693987801671028, 0.10091625899076462, -0.040096551179885864, -0.05343097448348999, -0.06458918750286102, -0.00034862858592532575, 0.05664932727813721, 0.06862415373325348, -0.03782445564866066, -0.031676240265369415, -0.04876160994172096, 0.032333772629499435, -0.06527462601661682, 0.12405464798212051, 0.111592136323452, 0.04839252308011055, 0.012436439283192158, -0.021056203171610832, 0.03570931404829025, -0.00724775530397892, -0.04233041778206825, -0.05873723700642586, -0.08367442339658737, -0.006593500263988972, 0.002439391566440463, 0.01219613291323185, 0.0051485877484083176, -0.028764860704541206, -0.06976939737796783, 0.0901438444852829, -0.0017897910438477993, -0.09411054849624634, -0.03168011084198952, 2.8125291097506762e-33, 0.026501387357711792, 0.020309848710894585, -0.016554102301597595, 0.04815756529569626, -0.08338035643100739, 0.1348828375339508, -0.03134060651063919, -0.08197186887264252, -0.06019297614693642, -0.06124570965766907, -0.0075420779176056385, 0.07632225006818771, -0.024524839594960213, 0.13804377615451813, -0.060377608984708786, -0.059060461819171906, -0.07726404815912247, -0.021037135273218155, 0.06920194625854492, -0.07703762501478195, 0.00022835574054624885, -0.03217976912856102, 0.008430326357483864, 0.004579172469675541, -0.001296637929044664, -0.06213734671473503, 0.021082276478409767, -0.04804209619760513, 0.027083637192845345, 0.0472726933658123, -0.0759582594037056, 0.02798066847026348, 0.03330336511135101, 0.037185560911893845, 0.014894267544150352, 0.003463073167949915, 0.022982759401202202, 0.0018419092521071434, -0.09279836714267731, 0.04844481125473976, -0.019714346155524254, 0.09988807141780853, -0.026141442358493805, 0.011705285869538784, 0.005313164554536343, 0.028672359883785248, 0.12026715278625488, 0.05048742517828941, -0.029282083734869957, -0.028393175452947617, -0.061898719519376755, 0.08850352466106415, 0.014908024109899998, -0.07755867391824722, 0.04405029118061066, -0.019411057233810425, 0.006225174758583307, 0.014060433022677898, 0.06249289959669113, -0.027575712651014328, -0.08450587093830109, 0.1640702784061432, -0.03600015118718147, 0.021900076419115067, -0.09446500241756439, 0.03305370360612869, -0.04520411416888237, 0.029158353805541992, -0.017097709700465202, 0.09506157785654068, 0.0043851230293512344, -0.026404598727822304, -0.04760945588350296, 0.02371400222182274, 0.007330654188990593, -0.039535749703645706, 0.014699377119541168, 0.08457785099744797, 0.014890873804688454, 0.024623766541481018, -0.036307696253061295, -0.05646126717329025, 0.11989178508520126, 0.032423537224531174, -0.0131525918841362, 0.003571129636839032, 0.0026907005812972784, 0.023664414882659912, 0.03598660230636597, 0.0009042117744684219, -0.03494125232100487, 0.05019981414079666, 0.04249484837055206, 0.007823828607797623, 0.03514852002263069, -4.905649064642389e-33, 0.01673509180545807, 0.06978917121887207, 0.0011293706484138966, -0.0913623794913292, 0.0036850380711257458, -0.04920076206326485, 0.06915059685707092, -0.01908668875694275, 0.04109090194106102, -0.04907933995127678, -0.028105998411774635, 0.07228107750415802, -0.0184613186866045, -0.0029649261850863695, -0.026128940284252167, -0.05274193733930588, 0.05258120596408844, -0.03799111396074295, -0.10206487029790878, -0.00985008291900158, -0.02789929136633873, 0.04478699341416359, -0.11129817366600037, 0.05487511679530144, -0.025446118786931038, 0.01246529258787632, -0.003668820019811392, -0.03152260184288025, -0.028457429260015488, -0.016261998564004898, 0.03922368213534355, 0.0408499650657177, -0.11129163205623627, 0.010771197266876698, -0.06959197670221329, 0.10677330195903778, -0.025028839707374573, 0.020867224782705307, -0.06686177104711533, -0.007647824473679066, 0.09525652229785919, -0.04923871532082558, 0.010849942453205585, -0.031779635697603226, -0.07391110062599182, 0.045326631516218185, -0.007921531796455383, -0.025434883311390877, -0.05259918048977852, 0.04947755113244057, -0.03862976282835007, 0.022984540089964867, -0.0212593711912632, 0.008592109195888042, -0.035832688212394714, -0.07829499989748001, 0.023573322221636772, 0.055764831602573395, -0.06432558596134186, 0.00009558039164403453, -0.008696945384144783, 0.05717107281088829, 0.11039306223392487, -0.015637492761015892, -0.05644342303276062, -0.04179678112268448, 0.03190374746918678, -0.07808796316385269, 0.062313832342624664, -0.007398784626275301, -0.034142930060625076, -0.01566673442721367, -0.05118587985634804, -0.04537026211619377, 0.05136564373970032, 0.052774231880903244, -0.03931354358792305, -0.02080604061484337, -0.01594422198832035, 0.03052341751754284, 0.008920226246118546, 0.00240747700445354, -0.06094534695148468, -0.06748443096876144, 0.08335196226835251, -0.0559130534529686, -0.044291362166404724, -0.06626270711421967, 0.07947217673063278, 0.04046248644590378, -0.05469033122062683, -0.0506669320166111, -0.08620833605527878, -0.06835021823644638, -0.03346465900540352, -5.1715659310502815e-8, 0.00014250259846448898, 0.035165935754776, 0.020153900608420372, 0.008591300807893276, -0.010174522176384926, 0.030476901680231094, 0.026936668902635574, 0.05912254750728607, -0.005982480011880398, 0.022273335605859756, 0.09911256283521652, 0.005274386145174503, 0.01962617039680481, 0.004735138732939959, -0.02315187081694603, 0.010867281816899776, -0.0032025373075157404, 0.06085416302084923, -0.007311391644179821, -0.052336160093545914, 0.02681177295744419, -0.011136502958834171, -0.0077178762294352055, 0.08004855364561081, 0.020712200552225113, -0.0058909691870212555, 0.017015449702739716, -0.04096752032637596, 0.04017507657408714, 0.022080352529883385, 0.0037528600078076124, -0.007467294577509165, -0.04286130890250206, -0.04305996373295784, 0.05650005117058754, -0.03693674877285957, -0.041214633733034134, 0.029876455664634705, -0.02041068859398365, 0.010007031261920929, -0.01653900556266308, 0.04784014821052551, 0.04116605967283249, 0.0016005370998755097, -0.02961232326924801, -0.016974909231066704, -0.10046025365591049, 0.04790996015071869, 0.0483119934797287, 0.03326430916786194, 0.016505269333720207, -0.07267580181360245, -0.016222333535552025, 0.028905382379889488, 0.08862703293561935, -0.030308779329061508, -0.027755672112107277, -0.06974811851978302, -0.06127709895372391, -0.06625520437955856, -0.024022113531827927, -0.06062278896570206, -0.0008643589681014419, -0.016934897750616074 ]

{ "pdf_file": "5F7F36M3NZCHDTIFIVI5JQRBDYNY6KJL.pdf", "text": "Gus travels to ANWR\n\r\n\r\nRecently Gus joined other House Republican Freshman on the &ldquo;American Energy Tour.&rdquo; Gus traveled to the\nNational Renewable Energy Lab in Golden, Colorado. In addition, Gus took an aerial tour of ANWR to examine\nexploration techniques, opportunities, and challenges in the oil industry and spoke with industry and government leaders. \r\n\r\n\r\nGus had the following comment after returning: \r\n\r\n\r\n\t\n\r\n\t\"This trip was an eye opening experience. We saw the present and the future of American energy. There are those who\nsay America must accept high gas prices. What I saw tells me America can produce enough oil domestically to fuel our\neconomy in the near term and use those revenues to invest in the renewable technologies of the future.\" \r\n\t\r\n\t\n\r\n\t \r\n\t\r\n\t\n\r\n\t \r\n\t\r\n\t\r\n\t\r\n\t\r\n\t\r\n\t\n\r\n\t Related Stories: \r\n\t\r\n\t\n\r\n\t Energy Resource Kit \r\n\t\r\n\r\nThe Online Office of Congressman Gus Bilirakis\nhttp://bilirakis.house.gov Powered by Joomla! Generated: 27 May, 2009, 18:51" }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "IJKB2B6V42DWTKVWIK7WSDYL7IIXTW47.pdf", "text": "" }

[ 0.01796095073223114, -0.032191239297389984, 0.014360201545059681, -0.07639560848474503, 0.0012225579703226686, 0.031456250697374344, 0.0047120037488639355, 0.028304271399974823, -0.0622674897313118, -0.09242726117372513, 0.007607310079038143, 0.007535596843808889, -0.009679357521235943, -0.012194360606372356, -0.0719420313835144, 0.02723105624318123, -0.09722493588924408, -0.06894762068986893, 0.0653749331831932, -0.08903191983699799, 0.0726088210940361, 0.03323589637875557, 0.0732981413602829, -0.003669357392936945, 0.08700408041477203, 0.019099624827504158, -0.014524775557219982, 0.07743436843156815, -0.0035462293308228254, 0.005594681482762098, -0.02492375485599041, 0.025303374975919724, 0.07127069681882858, 0.03336688503623009, -0.03400314971804619, -0.025467971339821815, -0.03214842453598976, 0.0930669978260994, -0.015043715015053749, 0.06252922862768173, 0.025157371535897255, 0.00882225576788187, 0.02469102293252945, 0.021537398919463158, 0.0769217237830162, 0.10355187952518463, -0.13634027540683746, 0.0178526658564806, -0.054077453911304474, -0.03324460983276367, -0.017151985317468643, -0.036782462149858475, -0.02994944527745247, 0.039635058492422104, 0.078412726521492, -0.0316992849111557, -0.027990739792585373, -0.03925943747162819, -0.0007176360813900828, 0.006034730467945337, 0.017440812662243843, -0.029665116220712662, -0.037131890654563904, -0.03677604719996452, 0.051392603665590286, 0.044802285730838776, 0.0071067167446017265, 0.06208544969558716, 0.03564602509140968, -0.004552814643830061, -0.01444738358259201, 0.04886825010180473, -0.1308441162109375, -0.006314816419035196, -0.04085171967744827, 0.037268735468387604, 0.057157162576913834, 0.06219358369708061, 0.02103428542613983, -0.09779657423496246, 0.0036750754807144403, 0.04824270308017731, 0.08765638619661331, 0.058217573910951614, 0.01795535534620285, -0.060760196298360825, -0.021360136568546295, -0.026717767119407654, -0.06087614223361015, 0.03354250267148018, -0.10383324325084686, -0.10289613902568817, 0.008554665371775627, -0.008036020211875439, 0.015420944429934025, 0.11561065912246704, -0.047176387161016464, -0.04330231621861458, 0.001669950783252716, -0.011363806203007698, 0.0006038731662556529, -0.09187578409910202, 0.142176553606987, -0.007736695930361748, -0.017148585990071297, 0.007895235903561115, 0.032457467168569565, -0.00483382772654295, -0.0060124266892671585, -0.12442062795162201, 0.02776557207107544, -0.018707262352108955, 0.04358936473727226, 0.004832814913243055, -0.036132220178842545, 0.044227663427591324, -0.03549010306596756, 0.10798855125904083, 0.09522078186273575, 0.0025289806071668863, -0.040178630501031876, -0.02369276061654091, -0.011630815453827381, -0.005341946147382259, -0.008189321495592594, -0.08726102113723755, -0.05421125888824463, 2.2419143971607826e-33, -0.02765384316444397, -0.08966022729873657, -0.048608992248773575, 0.003025365062057972, 0.0816577821969986, 0.043293870985507965, -0.09017273038625717, -0.014890951104462147, -0.11164794117212296, 0.0583772286772728, -0.08067886531352997, 0.008607528172433376, 0.01976681686937809, 0.06661249697208405, -0.0730195865035057, 0.04514743387699127, -0.006403310224413872, 0.0566348098218441, -0.057212069630622864, -0.08391304314136505, -0.01414605975151062, 0.011402737349271774, -0.02574470452964306, 0.0034671309404075146, -0.004373559262603521, 0.05091501399874687, -0.028987018391489983, -0.061157431453466415, 0.014977823942899704, -0.00788339227437973, -0.022179555147886276, 0.08779118955135345, 0.06852163374423981, 0.026133140549063683, 0.05246817320585251, -0.025273965671658516, 0.05228607729077339, -0.06466811895370483, 0.09038517624139786, 0.03891879320144653, 0.020795384421944618, 0.038303013890981674, -0.013218777254223824, -0.045127928256988525, 0.05300895869731903, 0.022316964343190193, -0.04096250981092453, 0.04252854362130165, 0.03543361276388168, 0.060781702399253845, 0.008117885328829288, 0.030956421047449112, -0.025239640846848488, -0.08098267018795013, -0.009334288537502289, -0.08009740710258484, 0.007877476513385773, 0.07445500046014786, -0.015120195224881172, 0.06066850200295448, 0.030522074550390244, 0.09116695076227188, 0.03304193168878555, -0.08121393620967865, 0.029831871390342712, -0.022097734734416008, -0.12307547777891159, -0.010388916358351707, 0.08764031529426575, 0.021160323172807693, -0.027321208268404007, 0.017403656616806984, 0.009825952351093292, -0.09275232255458832, -0.024680083617568016, -0.020668664947152138, -0.010726076550781727, -0.012343821115791798, -0.05982055887579918, 0.06357055902481079, -0.07707570493221283, -0.027143798768520355, -0.037859171628952026, -0.08927180618047714, -0.023164881393313408, -0.041064850986003876, 0.007891213521361351, -0.01232907548546791, 0.04147878661751747, -0.03787612169981003, -0.005100021604448557, 0.024382194504141808, -0.016561755910515785, 0.02133925072848797, 0.019260499626398087, -1.9623289432894557e-33, -0.0007724822498857975, 0.10955051332712173, 0.017714543268084526, -0.004472579341381788, 0.04175681248307228, -0.026717446744441986, 0.03345147520303726, -0.024580450728535652, 0.03387606143951416, 0.04498480260372162, 0.019520023837685585, -0.032147470861673355, -0.026252059265971184, -0.12696528434753418, 0.06743568927049637, -0.02893846482038498, -0.053098320960998535, 0.02247631549835205, -0.0476561076939106, -0.019116630777716637, -0.008342635817825794, -0.034923214465379715, -0.008415182121098042, 0.06126236170530319, -0.016225378960371017, 0.004486690275371075, 0.04107934236526489, -0.01654028706252575, -0.01343182660639286, -0.016494357958436012, -0.02638547308743, -0.08442548662424088, -0.07686912268400192, 0.042426224797964096, 0.05652332305908203, -0.038916390389204025, 0.06159495562314987, -0.006180975586175919, 0.01790420152246952, -0.0779675617814064, 0.06856537610292435, 0.10379906743764877, -0.05211072042584419, 0.06650940328836441, 0.0301376786082983, 0.077407605946064, 0.00966597255319357, 0.04401947930455208, 0.026241295039653778, -0.06889327615499496, -0.005396340973675251, 0.004209437407553196, 0.04576227068901062, -0.04797300323843956, -0.011056003160774708, -0.01732560619711876, 0.03285745903849602, 0.046748608350753784, 0.0035527634900063276, -0.007722978014498949, -0.017868148162961006, -0.08892042934894562, 0.03999599069356918, -0.015560227446258068, 0.02991458773612976, 0.056607022881507874, 0.012911084108054638, 0.046672720462083817, -0.02429666556417942, -0.01556376088410616, -0.01676524244248867, -0.04714273288846016, -0.014760310761630535, -0.01444788184016943, -0.05029286444187164, 0.05673104524612427, 0.02183125726878643, -0.024684110656380653, -0.0182883869856596, -0.013214667327702045, 0.02041744813323021, -0.04880275949835777, 0.016573796048760414, 0.13319969177246094, 0.04197739437222481, 0.007222404703497887, -0.03590109571814537, 0.1550060212612152, 0.08222685754299164, 0.08414609730243683, -0.014197510667145252, 0.09374316036701202, 0.00008834051550365984, 0.08460727334022522, 0.10790836811065674, -4.296718714158487e-8, 0.007693258114159107, -0.05041045695543289, -0.09378661960363388, -0.042763639241456985, 0.030244650319218636, 0.02638079971075058, -0.002528832759708166, 0.07131936401128769, -0.03455778956413269, 0.0036061692517250776, 0.05325266346335411, 0.027865877375006676, -0.0981513261795044, -0.05052259564399719, 0.10170400142669678, 0.018000155687332153, 0.038358524441719055, 0.07860347628593445, -0.02246819995343685, 0.02446145750582218, 0.0022597576025873423, -0.03049277327954769, 0.05518515035510063, 0.052913349121809006, -0.08206544071435928, -0.03044331818819046, -0.047393377870321274, 0.04964340850710869, -0.03353238105773926, -0.06720040738582611, 0.04457531496882439, -0.03993995115160942, 0.049328021705150604, -0.00879427045583725, 0.0759192481637001, 0.03448518365621567, -0.0959077998995781, 0.052669309079647064, 0.042597413063049316, 0.020355859771370888, -0.009197835810482502, -0.03961073234677315, 0.028490688651800156, 0.03444058448076248, -0.002117596799507737, -0.0035759583115577698, 0.013747936114668846, -0.06199019402265549, -0.04186173900961876, 0.018142249435186386, -0.043153900653123856, -0.03465240076184273, 0.07146041095256805, -0.003860235447064042, -0.07595650106668472, 0.0269162580370903, -0.049138374626636505, -0.04959540814161301, 0.04597509652376175, -0.0010662931017577648, -0.05659208074212074, 0.05502721667289734, -0.00593598373234272, 0.0039067924953997135 ]

{ "pdf_file": "PLOHNC5FBG7GG7BN7IZ5TLOLYMGRDOY6.pdf", "text": " \n \nVennDiagram Documentation \n \nDescription: Displays a Venn diagram. \nAuthor: Joshua Gould (Broad Institut e), gp-help@broad.mit.edu \nSummary: \nDisplays a Venn diagram illustrating set overlap. See the file format section of the \nGenePattern documentation for a description of the grp file format. \n \n \nParameters \nfeature.list.one Featur e list one - .txt, .grp \nfeature.list.two Feature list two - .txt, .grp \nfeature.list.three Featur e list three - .txt, .grp \n \n \n \n \n " }

[ -0.04068819060921669, 0.02390263043344021, 0.038763370364904404, 0.04831383749842644, 0.11737018078565598, -0.08988602459430695, 0.0007090498693287373, 0.04303921386599541, -0.08673213422298431, -0.02860145829617977, -0.020423877984285355, -0.009571673348546028, 0.053221385926008224, 0.06419539451599121, -0.04056478664278984, 0.05266190320253372, 0.009902292862534523, -0.049639247357845306, -0.0007362257456406951, 0.0347873717546463, 0.0904393121600151, 0.09041079878807068, 0.0014859060756862164, -0.05308060720562935, -0.04489940404891968, 0.01829492673277855, -0.09886742383241653, 0.02450837567448616, -0.05095455422997475, -0.04685983434319496, 0.05339263007044792, 0.0696069523692131, -0.018948649987578392, -0.08400455862283707, 0.10063257813453674, 0.035403184592723846, 0.10332400351762772, -0.03159356862306595, 0.014434359967708588, 0.034935157746076584, -0.07878578454256058, 0.033289145678281784, -0.005711132660508156, 0.02132311835885048, -0.06729717552661896, -0.09819895774126053, 0.0009020347497425973, -0.07440618425607681, 0.021496914327144623, -0.05395390838384628, 0.05478846654295921, 0.014474868774414062, 0.0383114367723465, 0.06564275920391083, 0.040613893419504166, -0.03132009133696556, -0.05403939634561539, -0.08299379795789719, -0.09441360831260681, -0.010602249763906002, 0.04679930955171585, 0.021802373230457306, -0.04766266793012619, -0.003214831231161952, 0.04607963189482689, 0.014370410703122616, -0.06406617909669876, -0.03442712873220444, 0.024613654240965843, -0.13103672862052917, -0.05862318351864815, -0.01334408763796091, 0.008742880076169968, -0.006704571656882763, -0.015203763730823994, 0.07417481392621994, 0.045925240963697433, 0.019132910296320915, 0.028044840320944786, -0.06430965662002563, -0.0037894328124821186, -0.004311021883040667, 0.03633371740579605, -0.02186359092593193, 0.01954345405101776, 0.11812586337327957, -0.07442009449005127, 0.003633001120761037, 0.05272318050265312, 0.0642193928360939, 0.05157345533370972, 0.020239880308508873, -0.005354702472686768, -0.00596427358686924, -0.002154696499928832, 0.003693817649036646, 0.04083516076207161, 0.021502774208784103, 0.010468633845448494, 0.07051408290863037, 0.06687504053115845, -0.02256867103278637, -0.0319659523665905, -0.07609819620847702, 0.04695351421833038, 0.0017135754460468888, 0.014971407130360603, 0.013983081094920635, -0.03285479545593262, 0.02102131024003029, 0.024375002831220627, 0.03764629364013672, 0.0004609652969520539, 0.03207223117351532, 0.00412614643573761, 0.04676385596394539, -0.042464956641197205, -0.019405869767069817, -0.026037415489554405, -0.05839981138706207, 0.01437058299779892, -0.0022436282597482204, -0.11882533878087997, -0.000015544366760877892, 0.05303248018026352, 0.03244216740131378, -0.014977418817579746, 1.0959584928673314e-32, 0.00823591835796833, 0.06538712978363037, 0.025357281789183617, -0.019130675122141838, 0.044816840440034866, -0.01406300812959671, 0.016666734591126442, -0.013453328981995583, 0.05109565332531929, 0.023594576865434647, -0.041631363332271576, 0.035764679312705994, -0.023103250190615654, -0.02693868987262249, -0.09293714165687561, -0.03292902559041977, -0.07417429983615875, -0.009591651149094105, -0.022882988676428795, -0.0470886155962944, -0.02759435959160328, -0.03886225447058678, -0.06222502887248993, 0.00009823558502830565, 0.048664480447769165, 0.08537601679563522, -0.07370134443044662, 0.00570846488699317, -0.06726060062646866, 0.04232478514313698, -0.011058138683438301, 0.002574468730017543, 0.02408095821738243, 0.02533021569252014, 0.08920387923717499, -0.07753408700227737, 0.04987882450222969, -0.018105894327163696, -0.1237260028719902, -0.06520094722509384, 0.06528141349554062, 0.10130476951599121, 0.017693106085062027, 0.13331708312034607, 0.026308853179216385, -0.07591372728347778, 0.08197379112243652, 0.08303351700305939, 0.10030139237642288, -0.0001344152697129175, -0.10314673185348511, -0.0041879392229020596, -0.021478690207004547, -0.08021708577871323, -0.02687908709049225, -0.03162791207432747, 0.008595969527959824, -0.03029230423271656, 0.07442976534366608, 0.021353650838136673, -0.03830097243189812, 0.14708104729652405, -0.09166612476110458, 0.05359494313597679, 0.05528489500284195, -0.11111360788345337, -0.04310191050171852, 0.05306607857346535, 0.06580480188131332, 0.045084398239851, 0.006626483052968979, -0.02217857539653778, -0.00570721086114645, 0.017396019771695137, 0.0016559663927182555, -0.06589730829000473, 0.017318954691290855, 0.03063451498746872, 0.031261906027793884, 0.003152711084112525, -0.03587634116411209, 0.007914509624242783, -0.022109603509306908, -0.013930395245552063, 0.014269459061324596, 0.030770357698202133, 0.0008509823237545788, 0.040730495005846024, 0.021131420508027077, 0.07898921519517899, 0.04319395497441292, 0.017598263919353485, 0.016561120748519897, -0.05699645355343819, -0.0515022873878479, -1.0603447609256594e-32, 0.0019621390383690596, -0.027319155633449554, 0.03123597986996174, -0.008923178538680077, 0.019017526879906654, -0.05894465744495392, -0.010575133375823498, -0.028072360903024673, 0.09763830155134201, -0.09712047129869461, -0.03795216605067253, 0.08469206839799881, 0.02755756862461567, -0.007804501801729202, 0.04130256175994873, 0.016564249992370605, -0.04836953058838844, -0.03957343101501465, -0.08798457682132721, 0.01346623245626688, -0.06160953268408775, 0.06668918579816818, -0.034065596759319305, 0.05757765844464302, -0.07684454321861267, 0.050301939249038696, 0.022714968770742416, -0.00692342733964324, 0.019144749268889427, -0.028318466618657112, -0.056322358548641205, -0.019430391490459442, -0.0579514279961586, 0.0651237815618515, -0.05204151198267937, -0.04519689828157425, 0.06705781072378159, 0.011927074752748013, -0.04917490482330322, -0.018270093947649002, 0.09358526766300201, 0.016040120273828506, -0.0030500302091240883, 0.06335572153329849, -0.06373415887355804, 0.05194113031029701, -0.02596382610499859, -0.08758267015218735, -0.0270755123347044, -0.016403192654252052, -0.0038798307068645954, 0.003470291383564472, -0.12108247727155685, 0.01301369909197092, 0.07192712277173996, -0.005531430244445801, 0.03265215456485748, -0.01066481601446867, -0.022810284048318863, 0.010326387360692024, 0.05723562836647034, 0.09342844784259796, -0.024167126044631004, 0.02499457448720932, 0.09332741051912308, -0.04251765459775925, -0.001762652420438826, 0.02101103775203228, 0.026875760406255722, 0.00673228083178401, 0.006241561844944954, 0.0027450404595583677, -0.06432750821113586, -0.15711306035518646, -0.018847815692424774, -0.04232468083500862, -0.0894901230931282, -0.03442373871803284, -0.06448641419410706, 0.0526130385696888, 0.02029447816312313, -0.006070009898394346, -0.08180206269025803, -0.012045595794916153, 0.06381134688854218, 0.04643711820244789, -0.06086587533354759, 0.002159161027520895, 0.025643453001976013, 0.04493240267038345, -0.0012689598370343447, -0.024960534647107124, -0.09646710753440857, 0.04664080962538719, -0.05426304042339325, -6.364354021570762e-8, 0.01792221888899803, 0.01580244116485119, -0.02580655738711357, 0.022720657289028168, 0.018645813688635826, 0.0004059636848978698, -0.022330833598971367, 0.04645795002579689, 0.026543058454990387, 0.04425407946109772, 0.08725202828645706, 0.03835694491863251, 0.07770749926567078, -0.025706905871629715, 0.012025311589241028, -0.09182848036289215, -0.0024697324261069298, 0.036781035363674164, -0.07673938572406769, -0.0011933319037780166, -0.044610779732465744, 0.019043242558836937, -0.057392850518226624, 0.023386865854263306, 0.04983586072921753, -0.013927294872701168, -0.04066033661365509, 0.06328312307596207, 0.0984608456492424, 0.005334025714546442, -0.023911092430353165, 0.027927717193961143, -0.1208980455994606, -0.011166082695126534, 0.03241286054253578, -0.09325294196605682, -0.009965457022190094, -0.03171638771891594, -0.017142925411462784, -0.018157489597797394, 0.0008239460294134915, 0.03371557220816612, -0.07113924622535706, 0.04839220270514488, -0.03228370100259781, -0.04947291687130928, -0.056159794330596924, -0.03132069110870361, 0.09048320353031158, -0.07369034737348557, 0.039875578135252, -0.1248568668961525, 0.0029314274434000254, 0.03476060926914215, 0.021512649953365326, -0.007231621537357569, 0.03307901695370674, -0.021487150341272354, -0.047686342149972916, -0.04714158922433853, 0.031184585765004158, -0.02604161575436592, 0.017484482377767563, 0.009333726018667221 ]

{ "pdf_file": "M6C6DEQ5LEULRCOK2LEADJ3AX3522H3E.pdf", "text": "SUSA.~A MARTINEZ \nGovernor NEW MEXICO \nENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT \nHazardous Waste Bureau \n2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 \nSanta Fe, New Mexico 87505-6303 \nPhone (505) 476-6000 Fax (505) 476-6030 RYAN FLYNN \nCabinet Secretary -Designate \nJOHN A SA.~CHEZ \nLieutenant Governor www.nmenv.state.nm.us BUTCH TONGA TE \nDeput} Secretar; \nTOM BLAINE. P.E. \nDirector \nEnvironmental Health D1vis1on \nCERTIFIED MAIL-RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED \nJanuary 3, 2014 \nPeter Maggiore \nAssistant Manager, Env. Projects Office \nLos Alamos Site Office, DOE \n3747 West Jemez Rd, MS A316 \nLos Alamos, NM 87544 \nRE: SECOND EXTENSION REQUEST Jeffrey D. Mousseau \nAssociate Director, Environmental Programs \nLos Alamos National Security, L.L.C. \nP.O. Box 1663, MS M991 \nLos Alamos, NM 87545 \nTO SUBMIT THE R-55i WELL REPLACEMENT WORK PLAN \nLOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY \nEPA ID#NM0890010515 \nHWB-LANL-08 -025 \nDear Messrs. Maggiore and Mousseau: \nThe New Mexico Environmen t Department (NMED) is in receipt of the United States \nDepartment of Energy (DOE) and the Los Alamos National Security, L.L.C.'s (collective ly, the \nPermittees) document entitled Request for Extension to Submit the R-55i Well Replacement Work \nPlan (Work Plan) dated November 26,2013 and referenced by EP2013-0298. The request has \nbeen automatically granted because NMED did not respond in writing within ten business days \nas specified in Consent Order Section III.J .2. \nThe Permittees request the extension to submit the Work Plan in order to continue focusing \nefforts on accelerating the shipment of aboveground transuranic waste to the Waste Isolation \nPilot Plant. This is the second extension to submit the Work Plan (the previous extension was \ngranted on July 16, 2013). \nThe date to submit the Work Plan has been changed from December 15,2013 to June 30,2014, \nas requested. c :::0 ...... s: \n~ :U \n0 s: 0 (/) m r o-> \n(J1 ~ \nERID-524124 Messrs. Maggiore and Mousseau \nJanuary 3, 2014 \nPage 2 \nNMED is concerned over delays that affect the progress of groundwater characterization \nand remediation; however, NMED is aware of the current uncertainties associated with \nthe allocation of DOE resources to the Permittees to fund groundwater monitoring and \ncleanup at the Laboratory. The Permittees must notify NMED, within seven days of \nreceipt of such information, should funds become available in the future that allow for the \nWork Plan to be submitted prior to June 30, 2014. If funding becomes available , NMED \nmay re-evaluate the deadline for completion of this project. \nShould you have any questions, please contact Ben Wear of my staff at (505) 476-6041. \nSincerely, \nOAftw \nJohn E. Kieling \nChief \nHazardous Waste Bureau \ncc: T. Blaine, NMED EHD \nD. Cobrain, NMED HWB \nN. Dhawan, NMED HWB \nB. Wear, NMED HWB \nJ. Kulis, NMED HWB \nM. Dale, NMED HWB \nS. Yanicak. NMED DOE OB \nL. King, EPA 6PD-N \nS. Paris, EP-CAP, MS A992 \nJ. McCann, EP-CAP, MS A992 \nC. Rodriquez, DOE-LASO, MS A316 \nH. Shen, DOE-LASO, MS A316 \nFile: Reading and LANL 2014-Groundwater, TA-54, R-55i --~·· \n,' \n/ : , CSRT/HIED ; 'AILm. :· · · \n7013 0600 0001 8711 4184 \n~ . \n/ \n/ NAME~ \nZ# ffi<WC \nDATE I -b--\"2--o ll.\\ \nENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT \nHazardous Waste Bureau \n2905 Rodeo Park Drive East -Bu~ding I \nSanta Fe, New Mexico 87505 \nwww .nmenv .stote.nm.us \nJeffrey D. Mousseau \nAssociate Director, Environmental Programs \nLos Alamos National Security, L.L.C. \nP.O. Box 1663, MS MeS..-A -\nLos Alamos, NM 87545 N I ~ D Hasler \n01/03/2014 \nUS POSTAGE \n~ F•RS'\"-C_-~;.'S \n$06.97 ~! \n~P~5M \n011011641177 \n· .. \n01-05-14 P01:20 IN " }

[ 0.0686878189444542, 0.00898326188325882, 0.07126311957836151, 0.013325443491339684, 0.09665106981992722, -0.02573072910308838, -0.055773232132196426, 0.02242983877658844, -0.03178763762116432, 0.11257336288690567, 0.0049273353070020676, -0.06322071701288223, -0.02428722009062767, 0.05928895249962807, -0.07395181059837341, 0.046310365200042725, -0.015638964250683784, -0.07883356511592865, -0.0456044003367424, 0.01314951665699482, 0.00449979305267334, 0.06569680571556091, -0.11871355026960373, 0.008622873574495316, -0.05730285122990608, -0.039633311331272125, -0.13948768377304077, 0.019739430397748947, -0.023155735805630684, 0.013526049442589283, -0.06627212464809418, -0.009911979548633099, 0.03052363730967045, -0.04905792325735092, -0.03333338722586632, -0.047449301928281784, -0.010174596682190895, -0.08535803109407425, -0.0496574304997921, 0.03314332291483879, -0.023552900180220604, 0.019859399646520615, 0.04791397973895073, -0.021813176572322845, -0.06103662773966789, 0.028586117550730705, -0.08610906451940536, -0.0031490458641201258, -0.04611754044890404, 0.08785244077444077, 0.024740686640143394, -0.07145293056964874, -0.05739118158817291, 0.029050450772047043, -0.028813300654292107, 0.028974926099181175, -0.05997930094599724, -0.07554814964532852, -0.009814810939133167, 0.05379968881607056, 0.025738686323165894, 0.030992262065410614, -0.10317683964967728, 0.005539676174521446, 0.06975561380386353, 0.03337777778506279, -0.15319199860095978, -0.04797219857573509, 0.011101432144641876, 0.013162405230104923, 0.03097301535308361, 0.01655196025967598, -0.030691156163811684, -0.08551271259784698, 0.017829500138759613, 0.008985122665762901, -0.034886155277490616, 0.06315823644399643, 0.10002104938030243, -0.11760659515857697, -0.0626085102558136, 0.024395493790507317, 0.026411021128296852, -0.05737578123807907, -0.014988783746957779, 0.004154185764491558, 0.010994297452270985, 0.01319714356213808, -0.006245976779609919, -0.0488196462392807, 0.0643220767378807, 0.020491477102041245, -0.02903205342590809, -0.007925691083073616, -0.0954756811261177, 0.12790043652057648, 0.03445306420326233, -0.038693591952323914, -0.018685562536120415, 0.00897160079330206, -0.05067039281129837, -0.027912145480513573, 0.007148989010602236, -0.09358199685811996, -0.05614583194255829, -0.047572169452905655, -0.09086620807647705, 0.07189633697271347, 0.003593354020267725, -0.002630414441227913, -0.001779851852916181, 0.0615873709321022, 0.046574827283620834, 0.1028512716293335, 0.030567144975066185, 0.0013023519422858953, 0.012466819025576115, -0.07856902480125427, 0.01632876694202423, -0.06680607050657272, -0.062079839408397675, -0.042185649275779724, 0.04755062982439995, 0.01633944921195507, 0.0796792283654213, 0.014057526364922523, -0.02610747516155243, 1.580778515075037e-34, 0.060319121927022934, -0.10123644769191742, 0.005673485342413187, -0.019888976588845253, 0.07638321071863174, -0.08582224696874619, -0.02453029341995716, -0.10674723237752914, 0.017092101275920868, 0.040664803236722946, -0.09410464763641357, -0.0026052568573504686, -0.05960464105010033, -0.05571795627474785, 0.04466567933559418, 0.054933544248342514, 0.00981139950454235, -0.014729155227541924, -0.09111999720335007, -0.006896256003528833, 0.020155586302280426, 0.021599361672997475, -0.0016298664268106222, -0.0655764564871788, 0.03054093010723591, -0.010750017128884792, -0.03772808983922005, 0.0010376573773100972, -0.054328154772520065, 0.019367525354027748, 0.11876150965690613, -0.03989846259355545, -0.04859501123428345, -0.046824678778648376, 0.0491238497197628, 0.04993101954460144, 0.09417381137609482, -0.04488757625222206, 0.022701425477862358, -0.04190196469426155, -0.004166319500654936, 0.012367169372737408, -0.01633644476532936, 0.023785751312971115, 0.07978429645299911, -0.03703879192471504, 0.04527604207396507, 0.07980789989233017, -0.047248855233192444, -0.01808890514075756, 0.00925285555422306, 0.08524848520755768, 0.06500901281833649, 0.016088347882032394, -0.019700361415743828, 0.048064351081848145, 0.03900083899497986, -0.0022520865313708782, -0.014293470419943333, 0.0848933607339859, 0.00028677890077233315, -0.0026375390589237213, -0.020251944661140442, -0.024192802608013153, -0.041022129356861115, -0.03273564577102661, 0.08238817006349564, 0.060347769409418106, 0.03686866536736488, -0.07160328328609467, -0.01565788872539997, -0.06975144147872925, 0.03314731642603874, -0.0026101067196577787, -0.0036241132766008377, -0.06856449693441391, 0.07719946652650833, 0.04319804161787033, 0.024059690535068512, 0.03639353811740875, -0.08375685662031174, 0.05411829054355621, -0.06336887925863266, 0.035242676734924316, -0.027227744460105896, -0.08490517735481262, -0.01266354788094759, 0.038966935127973557, -0.002697763964533806, 0.0621420294046402, 0.026758959516882896, 0.03298357501626015, 0.03269541263580322, 0.03848547488451004, 0.08047635853290558, -5.296257755896973e-33, 0.0369790680706501, -0.045854274183511734, 0.011144175194203854, -0.0021096591372042894, 0.019457338377833366, -0.0017774077132344246, 0.03765368089079857, 0.006225442048162222, 0.048509642481803894, -0.11282603442668915, -0.018801603466272354, 0.10038121044635773, 0.008838645182549953, 0.026465052738785744, 0.030942754819989204, -0.06109771132469177, -0.045306142419576645, 0.03426434099674225, -0.010509571991860867, 0.005764847621321678, 0.05093883350491524, 0.005540371872484684, 0.02355687879025936, 0.10379233956336975, -0.020842062309384346, 0.022202860563993454, -0.04552045837044716, -0.031130587682127953, -0.07723444700241089, -0.08000897616147995, -0.01316374633461237, 0.0002169860090361908, 0.04462108388543129, -0.0587707981467247, -0.12981602549552917, -0.06175065040588379, 0.04619200900197029, -0.04778124392032623, -0.03368787840008736, 0.08244079351425171, 0.1101909726858139, -0.018867334350943565, 0.04838594049215317, 0.004557655192911625, 0.0020506868604570627, 0.023601559922099113, 0.043495919555425644, -0.028325362130999565, -0.019306179136037827, 0.05509273335337639, 0.011264258064329624, 0.002064554253593087, -0.05787874758243561, 0.02091209590435028, 0.05285966396331787, -0.01596546545624733, 0.04349270835518837, -0.024157388135790825, -0.061063844710588455, 0.01867787353694439, -0.05909285321831703, 0.04554930329322815, -0.049461182206869125, 0.02342160977423191, 0.05724437162280083, 0.06353040784597397, -0.008642276749014854, -0.04755624756217003, 0.05925590917468071, -0.04511208459734917, -0.04726167768239975, -0.06041228398680687, 0.0013827028451487422, -0.005409559700638056, 0.09062695503234863, -0.04569372162222862, -0.03080841712653637, -0.022918498143553734, -0.018261851742863655, 0.02642197720706463, -0.03825356438755989, 0.057693857699632645, -0.00026523813721723855, 0.053233157843351364, 0.059012748301029205, 0.00047302557504735887, -0.0090664466843009, -0.09187602996826172, -0.014627935364842415, 0.005617647431790829, -0.026622837409377098, 0.026115475222468376, -0.08746130764484406, -0.017542405053973198, -0.009683589451014996, -5.663954993906373e-8, -0.0702841579914093, 0.11973465234041214, 0.018670162186026573, -0.02288324199616909, 0.0009317218791693449, -0.04648987203836441, 0.056837670505046844, 0.03657761216163635, -0.04943429306149483, -0.011518735438585281, -0.008384337648749352, -0.013250002637505531, 0.00574621232226491, -0.03466423600912094, 0.025437286123633385, -0.05939739570021629, 0.05671060457825661, -0.024253861978650093, -0.11625582724809647, 0.016565216705203056, -0.06821262091398239, -0.03880627453327179, 0.00898434966802597, 0.05092647299170494, -0.0249636210501194, -0.07046676427125931, 0.025115175172686577, -0.010464903898537159, 0.020102374255657196, 0.02624618262052536, 0.04876205697655678, 0.060911811888217926, 0.0376448780298233, 0.04995739087462425, 0.02333926036953926, 0.051241304725408554, -0.03806601092219353, 0.03938955068588257, 0.006598300766199827, 0.00022564167738892138, -0.05394037067890167, 0.04915820434689522, -0.058410100638866425, 0.019727686420083046, 0.01774333417415619, 0.09917372465133667, -0.030559130012989044, 0.04770803824067116, 0.025707105174660683, -0.040551889687776566, -0.03047705814242363, -0.07930450886487961, -0.02035290002822876, 0.015526862815022469, -0.030098916962742805, 0.020768044516444206, 0.050172265619039536, -0.06673983484506607, -0.004869026131927967, -0.022959740832448006, 0.08876233547925949, -0.13974256813526154, -0.06564060598611832, 0.03281387314200401 ]

{ "pdf_file": "UKNH3OQ2LY6SZKEQ7ITIOEHER4BHZEEN.pdf", "text": "Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n1 \n \nRevised Final \nRegional Forest Stewardship Standard \n \nfor the \n \nLake States -Central Hardwoods Region (USA) \nVersion LS V2.0 \nNovember 23, 2004 \n \n \n \nLake States Working Group \nof the \nForest Stewardship Council – US \n \n \n \n \nApproved by FSC -US Board, February 7, 200 2 \nAccredited by FSC International August 5, 2002 \nModified 10/4/04 for FSC -IC condition report ABU -REP-34-2003-09-16-US-LS.doc \nModified 11/16/04 for FSC -IC condition report ABU -REP-34-2004-11-03-US-LS.pdf \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nFacilitation \nNick Brown, nick.brown@wwfus.or g \nCoordination \nPhilip Guillery, pguillery@iatp.org \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n2 \nTable of Contents \n \n Page# \n \nIntroduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 \n \nBackground ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- 4 \n \nDefinition of Terms -------------------------------------------------------------- 6 \n \nPrinciple 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 \nPrinciple 2 -------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ 9 \nPrinciple 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 \nPrinciple 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13 \nPrinciple 5 ------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- 17 \nPrinciple 6 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 \nPrinciple 7 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29 \nPrinciple 8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34 \nPrinciple 9 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36 \nPrinciple 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 40 \n \nGlossary ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44 \n \nAppendix A (References) ------------------------------------------------------- 52 \n \nAppendix B, map and description of Lake States Region \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n3 Introduction \n \nThe Lake States -Central Hardwoods Regional Certification Standards were developed by the \nLake States Working Group, a chamber -balanced committee authorized by the Forest Stewardship \nCouncil -U.S. (FSC -U.S., National Initiative). Several years ago FSC-U.S. organized working groups in \nnine biogeographic regions of the contiguous 48 states and charged them with developing regional \nstandards specifying additional, regionally appropriate requirements for responsible forestry to augment \nthe more general Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Principles and Criteria. Regional working groups \ndeveloped drafts of the nine regional standards and submitted them to FSC -U.S. in 1999. \n \nWhile each set of draft regional standards demonstrated good critical thinking, tec hnical \nknowledge, and understanding of regional issues that are important to sustainable forestry, the draft \nregional standards varied significantly, both within and among drafts, with regard to quality of writing, \noutline format, level of detail, and comp rehensiveness. In order to ensure consistency across the \nstandards and to improve the level of scientific rigor, FSC -U.S. established a Standards Committee, \nwhose task was to develop a set of national indicators. The National Indicators were approved by FS C-\nU.S. in January 2001 and serve as baseline standards for the further development and refinement of the \nregional standards. The National Indicators are designed to “harmonize” standards across the nine \nbiogeographic regions of the conterminous 48 states. It is important to note that significant input from \ncertifiers, based on their experience conducting assessments, was incorporated into the National \nIndicators, which helps ensure the auditability of the indicators. \n \nFor The Lake States Central Hardwood r egion, indicators 4.4.e, 5.6.a, 6.2.a, and criterion 6.4 \nare considered fatal flaws. This means failure to meet these indicators or criterion will preclude the \nissuance of a FSC certificate. \n \nThis draft of the Lake States Central Hardwoods Standards conta ins revisions that incorporate \nnational baseline indicators from the National Indicators. In addition, the standards include region -\nspecific indicators that address regional ecological, social, and economic conditions. This draft was \nfinalized and approved by the Lakes States Working Group in January of 2002 after 4 years of work by \nthe group and a 60 -day public review period. All comments received during the public review period \nwere considered by the working group and incorporated, as appropriate, into th e final draft of the \nregional standards. \n \nConcepts and requirements expressed in the FSC Principles and Criteria are included in the \nproposed Lakes States -Central Hardwoods Regional Certification Standards. Those Criteria are \nconsidered applicable standard s, and during an assessment, certifiers are expected to evaluate the \ndegree to which each Criterion is met in the same manner as they evaluate the regional indicators. \n \nThe National Indicators, approved by the FSC -U.S. Board as baseline standards for the \ndevelopment of all nine regional standards (see://www.fscus.org/documents/) and the Lakes States -\nCentral Hardwoods Regional Certification Standards, are considered by the U.S Standards Committee \nto exemplify sufficient scientific and technical rigor for app lication to assessments of private, \nmunicipal, county, tribal, and state lands conducted by accredited certifiers in the continental United \nStates. This said, the Committee recognizes that additional indicators of performance may be required Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n4 on Federally m anaged public lands because of their particular public mandates. To date, neither the \nNational Indicators nor the Lake States -Central Hardwoods Regional Certification Standards apply to \nFederal lands, which means the Lakes States -Central Hardwoods Regional Certification Standards \napply only to private and non -Federal public lands. \n \nThe working group will remain constituted for future revisions. The standards will be revised as \nnecessary in response to new scientific information and/or changes in social -environmental \ncircumstances. A review -and-revision process will be initiated no less than five years following \napproval by FSC -A.C. FSC -U.S. will maintain a regional working group coordinator in the Lake \nStates-Central Hardwoods region. \n \nHarmonization with Ca nada \n \nA harmonization protocol between FSC US and FSC Canada was sent to the FSC ABU on \nOctober 12, 2004. This harmonization protocol is dated October 01, 2004, and has been signed by the \nPresident of FSC US and the Executive Director of FSC Canada. \n \nBackground \n \nThe Lake States Working Group of the FSC -U.S. Working Group was formed on November \n11, 1998 at the Audubon Center of the North Woods in Sandstone, Minnesota. Working Group \nmembers represent landowners, forest managers, state and county agencies, sa wmills, community \ninterests, and environmental conservation interests. Members come from the Central Hardwoods sub -\nregion and the Northwoods sub -region, from Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, \nMinnesota, and Michigan. \n \nLake States Worki ng Group Membership: \n \nWarren Baird Oak Grove Farm \nJim Birkemeier Timbergreen Forestry \nTom Buchele Environmental Law and Policy Center \nPeter Bundy Masconomo Forestry \nDavid Congos BIA, Minneapolis Area Office \nBetsy Daub Audubon Minnesota \nJim Erkel Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy \nDan Ernst Assistant State Forester, Indiana \nTim Flynn Flynn Lumber and Supply \nPhilip Guillery Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy \nMark Heyde Marathon County Forestry Department \nMark Jacobs Aitkin County Land Department \nJerry Kemperman Iowa DNR, Division of Forestry \nJohn Kotar University of Wisconsin - Madison \nTom Kroll Minnesota DNR, Forestry Division \nGigi LaBudde Bison Belly Futures \nJim Lee Executive Director, Ohio Forestry Association Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n5 Mike Neta Sustainable Forestry Systems \nGeorge Parker Department of Forestry, Purdue University \nMarshall Pecore Menominee Tribal Enterprises \nDan Pubanz Menominee Tribal Enterprises \nPhil Steklensiki Colonial Craft \nJeffrey Stringer University of Kentucky, Department of Forestry \nJay West BIA, Minneapolis Office \nAnne Woiwode Macinac Chapter, Sierra Club \nGinny Yingling North Star Chapter, Sierra Club \nDarrell Zastrow Wisconsin DNR \n \n \nAdvisors: \nBill Wilkinson FSC-U.S. \nFred Clark Clark Forestry \nDave Bubser SmartWood \n \n \nFacilitator: \nNick Brown World Wildlife Fund -U.S. \n \nCoordination: \nInstitute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, MN \n \nThe Lake States -Central Hardwoods Region \n \nCharacterization of the Region can only be made in broad terms. To provide at least some \nfocus, the Region is divided into Central Hardwoods (Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa) and \nNorthwoods (Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota) sub -regions. Appendix B describes the counties, \nwhich explicitly define the Lake States -Central Hardwoods Region . \n \nThe Northwoods sub -region can be immediately divided into northern and southern sections. \nThe upland forests of the northern section are characterized by potential dominance of shade -tolerant \nspecies (primarily sugar maple, red maple, American beech, basswood, and eastern hemlock) on mesic \nto dry mesic sites and by pines (jack, red, and eastern white), oaks (northern red, northern pin, and \nwhite) and aspen (trembling and bigtooth) on drier, nutrient -poorer sites. Presence of any of the conifer \nspecies in predominantly deciduous forest is another characteristic of the northern forest. There also are \nextensive lowland forests dominated by coniferous (balsam fir, northern white cedar, black spruce and \ntamarack) or deciduous species (black ash, red maple, b alsam poplar). \n \n The northern subsection is further characterized by an extensive cover of continuous forest with \nrelatively little fragmentation while the southern section is dominated by relatively small woodlots in \nan agricultural matrix. Historicall y, the predominant agent of natural disturbance was wind in the north \nand fire in the south. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n6 The forest of the southern section is characterized by a predominance of oaks (primarily \nnorthern red, white, black, bur) and a general absence of conifers. Many oak communities are fire -\ndependent and, where seed sources exist, are now succeeding to shade tolerant species. \n \nThe Central Hardwoods sub -region can be divided into the glaciated area of northern Iowa, \nIllinois, Indiana, and Ohio and the unglaciated sou thern portion of these states plus Kentucky. The \nnorthern area has limited topographic relief and highly fragmented natural ecosystems due to past \nclearing for agriculture. Further, the western portion of the glaciated area, from Iowa to western \nIndiana, w as historically a mixture of prairie and oak/hickory forest that was largely controlled by \nNative Americans through the use fire. The southern unglaciated area, on the other hand, has greater \ntopographic relief and much greater forest cover than the northe rn area. The entire sub -region has been \nheavily disturbed by human activities, which means that most of the existing forest stands date from \nthe late 1800s. \n \nThis sub -region has a great diversity of forest species that occur on sites ranging from dry to \nwet. A typical woodland has 20 to 30 species of commercially important trees. Due to past \ndisturbances, most of the forests are currently dominated by seral species of oak and hickory with more \ntolerant species of maple and beech in the sub -canopy. Many of the remaining old stands are dominated \nby seral species, which probably reflect Native American activities that predate European occupation of \nthe landscape. \n \nSpecies composition varies with site conditions. In the north, the relatively flat topography \ngenerally has poor surface drainage so a typical woodland has such wet site species as bur oak, swamp \nwhite oak, green ash, and red maple in depressional areas. In contrast, better -drained soils in the same \nwoodland have northern red oak, white oak, white a sh, American elm, and sugar maple as major \nspecies. In the more hilly southern areas, the above species occur along with black oak, scarlet oak, and \nchestnut oak on drier upper slope positions while yellow poplar becomes much more abundant on the \nbetter si tes of north facing slopes and in minor stream valleys. Major floodplains of the sub -region \ngenerally have flood tolerant species, such as eastern cottonwood and silver maple. \n \nConiferous species are of minor importance in this sub -region. Eastern red ceda r and Virginia \npine become more common in the southern areas. There are also a few relic stands of Northwoods \nspecies, such as eastern white pine and eastern hemlock. In addition, species of southern pine and \neastern white pine have been widely planted to control erosion on disturbed lands. \nFSC US Federal Lands Policy \n \nFor information on the certification of federal lands and the applicability of these standards in that context see \nFSC-US federal lands certification policy at: http://www.fscus.org/documents/ . Also, please see the \napplicability note at the start of the standard for further direction. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n7 Definition of Terms \n \n \nFollowing are definitions of terms adopted for the purposes of these standards. Defini tions of \nmore technical terms are included in the Glossary. \n \nApplicability Notes: \nApplicability Notes are intended to clarify some indicators by defining their scope of application. \n \nForest Management Plan : \nThe document or documents that govern forest management planning over short and long terms. \n \nForest Owner or Manager: \nAny person(s) who is (are) responsible for forest management decisions. \n \nIndicator: \nA regionally specific performance standard that is used by a certifier/assessor to determine if t he intent \nof an FSC Principle or Criterion is being met on a regional level. \n \nRegional Standards: \nStatements of required actions or methods of adherence to the FSC guiding principles, specific to a \nparticular biogeographic region. The adherence to region al standards by a forest owner or manager \nseeking certification must be addressed and evaluated by certifiers when they conduct assessments in \nthat region. In addition to regional indicators, a set of regional standards may include verifiers, vision \nstatements, explanatory notes, and a glossary. \n \nVerifiers: \nNon-binding examples of means or actions for meeting the requirements of indicators; qualitative or \nquantitative statements that aid forest owners or managers and certifiers in understanding the intent of \nindicators. Because of the wide variation in forest types and cultural values that can be found across a \nregion, verifiers are considered important tools but are not, in and of themselves, confirmations of \nsuccess or failure in meeting the intent of a regional indicator. In the Lakes States -Central Hardwoods \nRegional Certification Standards, all verifiers are identified by indentation and italics as in the example \nbelow. \n \nExample of draft regional indicator and accompanying verifier: \n6.6.c. Pesticides are applied as a management tool only in limited circumstances \nand under carefully controlled conditions. \n \nFor example: \n• There is no evidence of pesticide contamination in plant or animal \npopulations, soils, or water as a result of forest activities. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n8 Revised Final \nRegional Forest Stewardship Standard \nfor the \nLake States -Central Hardwoods Region (USA) \n \nApplicability Note to Regional Standard regarding certification of federal lands. The process for \ncertifying federal lands must comply with the FSC -US Boar d approved Federal Lands Policy and \nFederal Lands Findings, both of which are available at www.fscus.org . Certifiers should consult the \nFederal lands policy and findings to determine whether there are FSC -US approved indicators specific \nto the type of federal property being assessed, which must used in addition to these regional standards. \n \nPRINCIPLE #1: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND FSC PRINCIPLES \nForest management shall respect all applicable laws of the country in whic h they occur, and \ninternational treaties and agreements to which the country is a signatory, and comply with all \nFSC Principles and Criteria. \n \n1.1. Forest management shall respect all national and local laws and administrative \nrequirements . \n \n1.1.a. Fores t management plans and operations comply with applicable Federal, state, county, tribal, \nand municipal laws, rules, and regulations. \n \n For example: \n• All necessary permits are obtained. \n• There is neither evidence nor substantial claims of continued or intent ional non -compliance with \nlaws and regulations that relate to forest management by the forest owner or manager. \n \n1.1.b. Forest management plans and operations comply with state Best Management Practices (BMPs) \n(see Appendix for references) and other gover nment forest management guidelines applicable to the \nforest, both voluntary and regulatory (see also Criterion 6.5). \n \n For example: \n• Compliance with state, watershed, county, and planning district regulations. \n \n1.1.c. Forest management plans and operation s meet or exceed all applicable laws and administrative \nrequirements with respect to sharing public information, opening records to the public, and following \nprocedures for public participation. \n \n1.2. All applicable and legally prescribed fees, royalties , taxes and other charges shall be paid . \n \n1.2.a. Taxes on forest land and timber, as well as other fees related to forest management, are paid in \na timely manner and in accordance with state and local laws. \n \n For example: \n• Tax receipts verify that property and excise taxes have been paid. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n9 1.3. In signatory countries, the provisions of all binding international agreements such as \nCITES, ILO Conventions, ITTA, and Convention on Biological Diversity, shall be respected. \n \n1.3.a. Forest management operations c omply with all binding treaties or other agreements to which the \nU.S. is a party, including treaties with American Indian tribes. \n \n For example: \n• There is no evidence of non -compliance with relevant treaties and agreements. \n \n1.4. Conflicts between laws, re gulations and the FSC Principles and Criteria shall be evaluated \nfor the purposes of certification, on a case by case basis, by the certifiers and by the involved or \naffected parties. \n \n1.4.a. Where conflicts between laws and FSC Principles and Criteria oc cur, they are referred to the \nappropriate FSC body. \n \n1.5. Forest management areas should be protected from illegal harvesting, settlement and other \nunauthorized activities. \n \n1.5.a. Forest owners or managers implement measures to prevent illegal and u nauthorized activities in \nthe forest. \n \n For example: \n• The land manager paints and posts boundary notices, uses gates, makes periodic inspections, and \nreports illegal activities to the proper authorities. \n \n1.6. Forest managers shall demonstrate a long -term commitment to adhere to the FSC Principles \nand Criteria. \n \n \nApplicability note to Criterion 1.6.: Assessment of this criterion is guided by both FSC Policy and \nGuidelines: Partial Certification for Large Ownerships (FSC POL 20 -001 Partial Certification and \nthe FSC Guidelines for Certification Bodies FSC -STD-20-001 (version 2 -1)) both available at \nhttp://www.fsc.org/en/whats_new/documents/Docs_cent/2. \n \n1.6.a. Forest owners or managers provide written statements of commitment to the FSC Principles and \nCriteria. The commitment is stated in the management plan [see 7.1], a document prepared for the \ncertification process, or another official document. \n \n1.6.b Forest owners or managers document the reasons for seeking partial certification. \n \n1.6.c Forest owners or managers document strategies and silvicultural treatments for several harvest \nentries that meet the FSC Principles and Criteria (see Principle 7). \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n10 PRINCIPLE #2: TENURE AND USE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES \nLong-term tenure and use rights to the land an d forest resources shall be clearly defined, \ndocumented and legally established. \n \nApplicability Note: Property rights of private landowners are respected. The forest owner or manager \nof privately owned land retain their private property rights, while simu ltaneously honoring the rights \nof adjacent landowners. \n \n2.1. Clear evidence of long -term forest use rights to the land (e.g., land title, customary rights, or \nlease agreements) shall be demonstrated. \n \n2.1.a. Forest owners or managers document the legal a nd customary rights associated with the forest. \nThese rights include both those held by the party seeking certification and those held by other parties. \n \n2.1.b. Affected land boundaries are clearly identified on the ground by the forest owner or manager \nprior to commencement of management activities. \n \n2.2. Local communities with legal or customary tenure or use rights shall maintain control, to \nthe extent necessary to protect their rights or resources, over forest operations unless they \ndelegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. \n \nApplicability Note: For the planning and management of publicly owned forests, the local community \nis defined as all residents and property owners of the relevant jurisdiction. \n \n2.2.a. The forest owner or manager allows legal and customary rights to the extent that they are \nconsistent with the conservation of the forest resource and the objectives stated in the management \nplan. \n \nFor example: \n• Hiking, hunting, and fishing on non -posted property. \n• Visiting ancestral gravesites. \n \n2.2.b. On ownerships where customary use rights or traditional and cultural areas/sites exist, forest \nowners or managers consult with concerned groups in the planning and implementation of forest \nmanagement activities. \n \n2.3. Ap propriate mechanisms shall be employed to resolve disputes over tenure claims and use \nrights. The circumstances and status of any outstanding disputes will be explicitly considered in \nthe certification evaluation. Disputes of substantial magnitude involv ing a significant number of \ninterests will normally disqualify an operation from being certified. \n \n2.3.a. The forest owner or manager maintains relations with community stakeholders to identify \ndisputes while still in their early stages. If disputes arise , the forest owner or manager initially attempts \nto resolve them through open communication, negotiation, and/or mediation. If negotiation fails, \nexisting local, state, Federal, and tribal laws are employed to resolve claims of land tenure (see \nGlossary). Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n11 2.3.b. The forest owner or manager provides information to the certification body regarding \nunresolved and/or ongoing disputes over tenure and use -rights. . \n \n \nPRINCIPLE #3: INDIGENOUS PEOPLES' RIGHTS \nThe legal and customary rights of indigenous peoples to own, use and manage their lands, \nterritories, and resources shall be recognized and respected. \n \nApplicability Note: Under Principle 3, the terms \"tribes,\" \"tribal,\" or \"American Indian groups\" \ninclude all indigenous peoples in the U.S., groups or indi viduals, who may be organized in recognized \nor unrecognized tribes, bands, nations, native corporations, or other native groups. \n \n3.1. Indigenous peoples shall control forest management on their lands and territories unless \nthey delegate control with fre e and informed consent to other agencies. \n \n3.1.a. On tribal lands, forest management and planning includes a process for input by tribal members \nin accordance with their laws and customs. \n \n For example: \n• Forest owners or managers utilize tribal experience , knowledge, practices, and insights in forest \nmanagement planning and operations on tribal lands when requested to do so by the tribal landowner. \n \n \n3.1.b. Forest management on tribal lands is delegated or implemented by an authorized tribal \ngoverning bod y. \n \n For example: \n• A tribal body that is either elected or based on hereditary appointment authorizes the forest \nmanagement operations. \n• Documents verify the authority of the tribal body. \n \n3.2. Forest management shall not threaten or diminish, either direc tly or indirectly, the \nresources or tenure rights of indigenous peoples. \n \n3.2.a. Forest owners or managers identify and contact American Indian groups that have customary use \nrights or other legal rights to the management area and invite their participat ion in the forest planning \nprocesses, appropriate to the scale and intensity of the operation. (see also Criterion 4.4.) \n \n3.2.b. Steps are taken during the forest management planning process and implementation to protect \ntribal resources that may be direct ly affected by certified operations such as adjacent lands, bodies of \nwater, critical habitats, and riparian corridors as well as other resource uses such as rights to hunt, fish, \nor gather. \n \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n12 3.3. Sites of special cultural, ecological, economic or relig ious significance to indigenous peoples \nshall be clearly identified in cooperation with such peoples, and recognized and protected by \nforest managers. \n \n3.3.a. Forest owners or managers make systematic efforts to identify areas of cultural, historical, \nand/or religious significance. They invite participation of tribal representatives (or other appropriate \npersons, where tribal entities are lacking) in the identification of current or traditionally significant sites \nwithin the forest proposed for certificat ion. \n \n \n For example: \n• Such efforts include surveying, recording, assessment, establishment, and use of special use and \nprotected areas when and where they are mandated by treaty rights. \n• Forest owners or managers check existing heritage and cultural databas es. \n• Areas of cultural, historical, and religious significance as well as areas of traditional use, are \ndocumented by authorized tribal leaders or their designated representatives. \n \n For example, areas of special significance may include: \n• Ceremonial, buria l, or village sites; \n• Areas used for hunting, fishing, or trapping; \n• Current gathering areas for culturally important or ceremonial materials, such as Basket materials, \nmedicinal plants, or plants used in dances; \n• Current gathering areas for subsistence uses, such as mushrooms, berries, acorns, etc. \n \n3.3.b. Forest owners and managers consult with tribal leaders (or other appropriate persons, where \ntribal entities are lacking) to develop mechanisms that ensure forest management operations protect \nfrom damage o r interference those areas described in 3.3.a. and incorporate these special places into \nforest management and operational plans. \n \n3.3.c. Confidentiality of disclosures is maintained in keeping with applicable laws and the \nrequirements of tribal represen tatives. \n \n3.4. Indigenous peoples shall be compensated for the application of their traditional knowledge \nregarding the use of forest species or management systems in forest operations. This \ncompensation shall be formally agreed upon with their free and informed consent before forest \noperations commence. \n \n3.4.a. Forest owners or managers respect the confidentiality of tribal knowledge and assist in the \nprotection of tribal intellectual property rights. \n \n For example: \n• When traditional ecological knowled ge is requested for use in forest management, protocols are \njointly developed with local tribes to protect the intellectual property rights of those tribes. \n \n \n3.4.b. A written agreement is reached with individual American Indians and/or tribes prior to \ncommercialization of their indigenous intellectual property, traditional knowledge, and/or forest \nresources. The individuals and/or tribes are compensated when such commercialization takes place. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n13 PRINCIPLE #4: COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND WORKERS’ RIGHTS \nForest management operations shall maintain or enhance the long -term social and economic \nwell-being of forest workers and local communities. \n \n4.1. The communities within, or adjacent to, the forest management area should be given \nopportunities for employment, t raining, and other services. \n \n4.1.a. Opportunities for e mployment, contracting, procurement, processing, and training are as good \nfor non-local service providers as they are for local service providers doing similar work. \n \n For example: \n• Forest owners or managers give local goods and service providers an equal opportunity to bid on all \ncontracts and services. \n• Timber sales are offered in quantities and intervals that allow participation by local companies of all \nsizes. \n• Forest owners or managers utilize qua lified local employees and contractors. \n \n4.1.b. Forest work is packaged and offered in ways that create quality work opportunities for \nemployees, contractors, and their workers. \n \nFor example, quality work can include, the following attributes: \n• Employee and contractor relationships that are long term and stable; \n• A mixture of diverse tasks that require varying skill levels; \n• Opportunities for employees to advance; \n• A comprehensive package of benefits; \n• Opportunities for employee and contractor participation in decision -making; \n• Employment conditions (e.g., remuneration, benefits, safety equipment, training, and workman’s \ncompensation) are as good for non -local workers as they are for local workers doing the same job; \n• Forest owners or managers provide and/or su pport training opportunities for workers to improve \ntheir skills. \n \n4.1.c. Forest owners or managers contribute to public education about forestry practices. \n \n For example: \n• The forest is offered as a training and/or educational resource for local people in conjunction with \nschools, community colleges, and/or other providers of training and education. \n \n4.1.d. Forest owners or managers participate and invest in the local economy and civic activities. \n \n For example: \n• Forest owners or managers participate in fund -raisers, field days, and local forestry committees. \n• Facilities and equipment are regularly maintained and updated. \n• Out-of-area owners maintain a local office. \n• The forest owner or manager supports local business development by working with organiza tions, \nsuch as chambers of commerce. \n \n \n4.1.e. Employee compensation and hiring practices meet or exceed the prevailing local norms for work \nwithin the forest industry that requires equivalent education, skills, and experience. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n14 4.1.f. Forest owners or ma nagers assure that contractors, subcontractors, intermediaries, and persons \nhired by them are covered and protected by all state and Federal labor laws regarding discrimination, \nwages, benefits, and other conditions of employment. \n \n For example: \n• Contracts contain clauses specific to legal coverage and protection. \n• Owners and managers monitor compliance with laws. \n• Employees are not discriminated against because of gender, race, religion, age, or disability. \n \n4.2. Forest management should meet or exce ed all applicable laws and/or regulations covering \nhealth and safety of employees and their families. \n \n4.2.a. The forest owner or manager and their contractors develop and implement safety programs and \nprocedures. \n \nFor example: \n• Machinery and equipment are well -maintained and safe. \n• Safety equipment appropriate to each task is used. \n• Safety procedures are documented and posted in the workplace. \n• Education in safety is offered (such as Forest Industry Safety Training Alliance and Game of \nLogging) . \n• Contracts include safety requirements. \n• For employees, safety records, training reports, and certificates are maintained. \n \n4.3The rights of workers to organize and voluntarily negotiate with their employers shall be \nguaranteed as outlined in Conventions 87 and 98 of the International Labour Organization \n(ILO). \n \nApplicability Note: This Criterion is guided by FSC guidelines on ILO Conventions \n(http://www.fsc.org/en/whats_new/documents/Docs_cent/2). \n \n4.3.a. Forest workers are free to associate with other workers for the purpose of advocating for their \nown employment interests. \n \n4.3.b. Forest owners or managers and their contractors develop effective and culturally sensitive \nmechanisms to resolve disputes between workers and management. \n \nExamples of culturally sens itive mechanisms are: \n• Translation and cultural interpretation, when needed; \n• Cross-cultural training, when needed, to integrate the workforce. \n \n4.4. Management planning and operations shall incorporate the results of evaluations of social \nimpact. Consult ations shall be maintained with people and groups directly affected by \nmanagement operations. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n15 Applicability Note: People and groups directly affected by management operations may include: \nemployees and contractors of the landowner, neighbors, fishers, hu nters and gatherers, \nrecreationalists, water users, and forest products processors. \n \n4.4.a. On lands with multiple owners, a process is provided that assures the opportunity for fair and \nreasonable input from the landowners and/or shareholders. \n \n4.4.b. Input is sought in identifying significant sites of archeological, cultural, historical, or community \nimportance, that are to be designated as special management zones or otherwise protected during \noperations. \n \n For example: \n• State archeological offices, universities, and local experts have been consulted to identify known \nareas and develop protection plans. \n \n4.4.c. Viewpoints and feedback are solicited from people and groups directly affected by forest \nmanagement operations and its associated environmen tal and aesthetic effects (e.g., logging, burning, \nspraying, and traffic). Significant concerns are addressed in management policies and plans. \n \n4.4.d. Forest owners or managers of large and mid -sized (see Glossary) forests provide opportunities \nfor people directly affected by management operations to provide input into management planning. \n \n4.4.e. For public forests, consultation will include the following components: \n \nNote: ‘The public’ includes people and groups directly affected by management oper ations and all \ncitizens of the relevant jurisdiction. \n \nApplicability Note: For the purposes of indicator 4.4.e each numbered component should be scored \nseparately. \n \n1. Legislative and historical mandates are included in the plan, and provisions are made for their \naccomplishment. \n \n For example: \n• Legal mandates are carried out. \n \n2. Clearly defined and accessible methods for public participation are provided in both the strategic \n(long-range) and tactical (short -range) planning processes, including initi al adoption and subsequent \namendments. \n \nApplicability Note: Strategic plans may be very general. Tactical plans are specific and describe \ncandidate stands for proposed silvicultural activities . \n \n For example: Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n16 • Administrative rules or other documentati on are provided for public input. \n• Some routine activities with little or no environmental impact that appear unlikely to solicit input may \nbe exempted from the procedures of public notification and comment. Examples of such activities \ninclude, but are not limited to: \n 1) Maintaining existing buildings or structures \n 2) Maintaining existing permanent roads or trails \n 3) Maintaining existing open -land areas (e.g., mowing grass) \n 4) Minor changes to tactical plans (e.g., small changes to areas affected) \n• Public agencies solicit public input as early as practicable into the process. \n \n3. Public notification is sufficient to allow interested citizens of the affected jurisdiction and/or other \npeople and groups directly affected by management operations the ch ance to learn of upcoming \nopportunities for public review and/or comment on the proposed management. \n \n4. The final planning decisions are based on legal mandate, public input, credible scientific analysis, and \nthe productive capacity of the land and are ma de by professional employees, hired by the public, or other \nlegally authorized parties. \n \nFor example: \n• Evidence of how public comments are considered is provided. \n \n5. An accessible and affordable appeals process to planning decisions is available. \n \nNote: FSC certification does not preclude any individual or group from seeking legislative or judicial \nrelief. \n \n4.5. Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed for resolving grievances and for providing fair \ncompensation in the case of loss or damage affecting the legal or customary rights, property, \nresources, or livelihoods of local peoples. Measures shall be taken to avoid such loss or damage. \n \nApplicability Note: Provisions of Criterion 4.5. do not evoke protections or liabilities beyond those \nprovided by Federal, state, and local laws. \n \n4.5.a. The forest owner or manager attempts to resolve grievances and mitigate damage resulting from \nforest management activities through open communication and negotiation prior to legal action. \n \n4.5.b. Forest owners o r managers and their contractors have adequate liability insurance. \n \n \nPRINCIPLE #5: BENEFITS FROM THE FOREST \nForest management operations shall encourage the efficient use of the forest’s multiple products \nand services to ensure economic viability and a wi de range of environmental and social benefits. \n \n5.1. Forest management should strive toward economic viability, while taking into account the \nfull environmental, social, and operational costs of production, and ensuring the investments \nnecessary to mainta in the ecological productivity of the forest. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n17 5.1.a. The forest owner or manager is willing and able to support long -term forest management (i.e., \ndecades rather than quarter -years or years), such as planning, inventory, resource protection, and post -\nharvest management activities. \n \n5.1.b. Responses (such as increases in harvests or debt load) to short -term financial factors (such as \nmarket fluctuations and sawmill supply requirements) are limited to levels that enable fulfillment of the \nmanagement plan . \n \n5.1.c. Investment and/or reinvestment in forest management are sufficient to fulfill management \nobjectives and maintain and/or restore forest health and productivity. \n \n For example: \n• Investments have been made in forest stand improvement activities and information systems. \n• Forest conditions confirm that investments are adequate. \n \n5.2. Forest management and marketing operations should encourage the optimal use and local \nprocessing of the forest’s diversity of products. \n \n5.2.a. Opportunities are given to local, financially competitive, value -added processing and \nmanufacturing facilities. \n \nFor example: \n• The technical and financial specifications of some sales of forest products are scaled to allow \nsuccessful competition by small businesses. \n \n5.2.b. Whe n non-timber products are harvested, the management and use of those products is \nincorporated into the management plan. \n \n5.2.c. New markets are explored for products from common but underutilized forest species. \n \n5.3. Forest management should minimize wa ste associated with harvesting and on -site \nprocessing operations and avoid damage to other forest resources. \n \n5.3.a. Adequate quantities and a diversity of size classes of woody debris (considered a reinvestment \nof biological capital under this criterion —not an economic waste) are left on the forest floor to \nmaintain ecosystem functions, wildlife habitats, and future forest productivity. \n \n5.3.b. The loss and/or waste of merchantable forest products is minimized. \n \n For example: \n• Harvested products are han dled to minimize potential loss in value. \n• Waste from on -site processing facilities (e.g., portable sawmills) is minimized and used as an input \ninto a productive process. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n18 5.3.c. Harvest practices minimize residual stand damage. \n \n For example: \n• Soil compac tion, rutting, and erosion are minimized. \n• Provisions that define acceptable levels of residual damage are included in operational contracts. \n• Low-impact logging techniques are used. \n• Non-timber forest products are protected from damage by management activiti es. \n• Bumper trees are utilized and equipment is selected and used in a way that minimizes unintentional \ndamage to residual trees. \n \n5.4. Forest management should strive to strengthen and diversify the local economy, avoiding \ndependence on a single forest pr oduct. \n \n5.4.a. Forest management diversifies forest uses and products, while maintaining forest composition, \nstructures, and functions. \n \nFor example: \n• Compatible uses may include recreation, ecotourism, hunting, fishing, and specialty products. \n \n5.5. Fo rest management operations shall recognize, maintain, and, where appropriate, enhance \nthe value of forest services and resources such as watersheds and fisheries. \n \nThe Working Group considers that this criterion is sufficiently explicit and measurable, so does not \nrequire indicators. \n \n5.6. The rate of harvest of forest products shall not exceed levels that can be permanently \nsustained. \n \n5.6.a. The sustainability of harvest levels is based on growth and regeneration data, site index models, \nsoil classific ation, and/or desired future conditions. The required level of documentation is determined \nby the scale and intensity of the operation. \n \n For example: \n• Stocking rates, growth rates, and removal volumes conform to projections of the long -term written \nmanagem ent plan. \n• The age -class distribution (see Glossary) required for a sustainable -yield volume is justified by data. \n \n5.6.b. After the species composition and the age -class (see Glossary) distribution commensurate with \nlong-term sustainability have been achi eved, harvest and growth records demonstrate that the volume \nharvested during any 10 -year span is less than the net growth accumulated over that same period. \nExceptions to this constraint may be granted to forest owners or managers whose periodic cycle of re-\nentry is longer than 10 years. In such cases, allowable harvest is determined by examining the volume \nof re-growth and removal since the previous harvest and the forest owner or manager’s commitment to \nallow an equivalent amount of re -growth before add itional harvests. \n \nFor example: \n• Rapid growth rates in younger forests are not used as the sole justification for the harvest of slower -\ngrowing, older forests. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n19 5.6.c. If rates of harvest are temporarily accelerated to compensate for or prevent unacce ptable \nmortality, or in cases of salvage operations (see Indicator 6.3.c.4), the rate of future harvest is \nrecalculated accordingly to meet desired future conditions, and the adjusted rate of harvest is \nimplemented within three years of the temporary accel eration. \n \nPRINCIPLE #6: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT \nForest management shall conserve biological diversity and its associated values, water resources, \nsoils, and unique and fragile ecosystems and landscapes, and, by so doing, maintain the \necological functions and the integrity of the forest. \n \n6.1. Assessments of environmental impacts shall be completed -- appropriate to the scale, \nintensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources -- and adequately \nintegrated into management systems. As sessments shall include landscape level considerations as \nwell as the impacts of on -site processing facilities. Environmental impacts shall be assessed prior \nto commencement of site -disturbing operations. \n \nApplicability Note: Small forest owners or manag ers who practice low intensity forestry may meet this \nrequirement with brief, informal assessments. More extensive and detailed assessments (e.g., formal \nassessments by scientists) are expected by large forest owners or managers and/or those who practice \nmore intensive forestry management (see Glossary). \n \n6.1.a. Using credible scientific analyses and local expertise, an assessment of current conditions is \ncompleted to include: \n• Disturbance regimes and successional pathways; \n• Unique, vulnerable, rare, and th reatened communities; \n• Common plants, animals, and their habitats; \n• Sensitive, threatened, and endangered species and their habitats; \n• Water resources; and \n• Soil resources (see also Indicators 7.1.a and b). \n \n6.1.b. Using available science and local expert ise, the current ecological conditions are compared to \nboth the historical conditions and desired future conditions within the landscape context. This \ncomparison is done by employing the baseline factors identified in 6.1.a. \n \n6.1.c. Prior to the comme ncement of management activities, potential short -term environmental \nimpacts and their cumulative effects are evaluated. \n \n6.1.d. Using assessments derived from the above information, management options are developed and \nimplemented to achieve the long -term desired future conditions and ecological functions of the forest \n(see also Criterion 7.1). \n \n6.2. Safeguards shall exist which protect rare, threatened and endangered species and their \nhabitats (e.g., nesting and feeding areas). Conservation zones and protection areas shall be \nestablished, appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of \nthe affected resources. Inappropriate hunting, fishing, trapping, and collecting shall be \ncontrolled. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n20 6.2.a. Although species that are state and/or Federally listed as threatened, endangered, of special \nconcern, or sensitive, and their habitats are identified, their specific locations remain confidential. \n \nNote: On public forests and large private forests, the general locations of state and/or Federally listed \nas threatened, endangered, of special concern, or sensitive species are made available to the public. \n \n For example: \n• The forest owner or manager has contacted the state natural heritage program (or its equivalent) to \nobtain a list of listed species and their habitat or community type to document their presence or \npotential presence. \n• An on-the-ground survey for listed species has been conducted. \n• The locations of such species are mapped. \n• Management plans provide descriptions of a ctivities appropriate for maintaining such species’ \nhabitat(s). \n• Management activities are compatible with endangered species recovery plans and/or habitat \nconservation plans. \n• Evidence of communication and/or collaboration with relevant experts is demonstr ated. \n• The forest owner or manager participates in programs to protect listed species. \n• Forestry staff receives training in the identification of listed species and their habitat requirements. \n \n6.2.b. If scientific data indicate the likely presence of state and/or Federally listed as threatened, \nendangered, of special concern, or sensitive populations, either new surveys are carried out before \nfield-management activities begin or the forest owner or manager assumes their presence and makes \nappropriate modifi cations in forest management. \n \n6.2.c. For management planning purposes, forest owners or managers of publicly owned and large \nprivately owned forests use, participate in, or carry out on -the-ground assessments for the occurrence of \nstate and/or Federally listed as threatened, endangered, of special concern, or sensitive species. \n \n For example: \n• The forest owner or manager uses an appropriate survey for listed species. \n \n6.2.d. Where they have been identified, state and/or Federally listed as threatened, e ndangered, of \nspecial concern, or sensitive species and their habitats are maintained and/or restored. Multiple -use \nmanagement activities are acceptable, where the law allows, in these species’ habitat areas to the extent \nthat they are compatible with mai ntenance and restoration of the species. \n \n For example: \n• Within the context of existing landscape and ownership patterns, conservation zones for listed \nspecies and other protected areas are arranged to enhance the viability of habitats, including their \nconnectivity. \n \n6.2.e. If a state and/or Federally listed as threatened, endangered, of special concern, or sensitive \nspecies is determined to be present, its location is reported to the manager of the species’ database. \n \n6.3. Ecological functions and valu es shall be maintained intact, enhanced, or restored, including: \na) Forest regeneration and succession. \nb) Genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity. \n c) Natural cycles that affect the productivity of the forest ecosystem . Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n21 6.3.a. Forest regeneration an d succession \n \nApplicability Note: Indicators 6.3.a.1. through 6.3.a.4. are intended to be applied sequentially. \n \n6.3.a.1. Forest owners or managers make management decisions using credible scientific information \n(e.g., site classification) and information on landscape patterns (e.g., land use/land cover, non -forest \nuses, habitat types); ecological characteristics of adjacent forested stands (e.g., age, productivity, \nhealth); species’ requirements; and frequency, distribution, and intensity of natural distu rbances. \n \nApplicability Note: This indicator may apply only marginally to managers of small and mid -sized \nforest properties because of their limited ability to coordinate their activities with other owners within \nthe landscape or to significantly maintain and/or improve landscape -scale vegetative patterns. \n \n6.3.a.2. Silvicultural practices encourage regeneration that moves the forest toward a desired future \ncondition, consistent with information gathered in 6.3.a.1. \n \n For example: \n• Native species suited to the site are selected for regeneration. \n• Within five years of a regeneration harvest, adequate regeneration exists to move the stand toward \ndesired future conditions. Exceptions are noted and documented. \n \nNote: Development of a forest that is capable of natural regeneration, based on desired future \nconditions, is encouraged. \n \n6.3.a.3. Measures are taken to ensure the retention of endemic and difficult -to-regenerate species. \n \nFor example: \n• Deer populations are controlled to enhance successful regeneratio n. \n \n6.3.a.4. Across the forest, or the landscape in which it is located, management actions lead to a \ndistribution of successional stages, age classes, and community types appropriate to the scale and \nintensity of the operation and desired future conditio ns. \n \n For example: \n• Large forests are managed so that large, contiguous, and interconnected patches of habitat are well \ndistributed across the landscape, in such a way as to allow dispersal of species sensitive to \nfragmentation. \n• Within a context of liabil ity and public safety, large forests and public forests are managed to allow \nthe occurrence of natural components, structures, and disturbance regimes. \n \n6.3.a.5. When even -aged management (see Glossary) is employed, live trees and native vegetation are \nretained within the harvest unit in a proportion and configuration that is consistent with the \ncharacteristic natural disturbance regime in each community type (see Glossary). Exceptions may be \nallowed when retention at a lower level is necessary for purpo ses of forest restoration and/or \nrehabilitation or to maintain community types that exist on the site (e.g., oak -hickory, jack pine). The \nlevel of retention increases proportionally to the size of the harvest unit. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n22 6.3.b. Genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity \n \n6.3.b.1. Forest management conserves native plant and animal communities and species. \n \nFor example: \n• Declining trees and snags (see Glossary) are left in the forest. \n• Vertical and horizontal structural complexity is maintained. \n• Diversity of und erstory species is maintained. \n• Well-distributed, large woody debris is maintained. \n• Habitats and refugia for sedentary species and those with narrow or special habitat requirements \nare created and/or maintained. \n• Artificial regeneration uses locally adapted seed and seedlings. \n \n6.3.b.2. The forest owner or manager cooperates with local, state, and Federal agencies to protect and \nmanage native plant and animal communities and species. \n \n6.3.b.3. There is a consistent scientific method for selecting trees to p lant, harvest and retain in order \nto preserve and/or enhance broad genetic and species diversity. \n \nFor example: \n• Phenotypic diversity is maintained, in accordance with desired future conditions. \n \n6.3.b.4. Forest owners or managers maximize habitat connect ivity to the extent possible at the \nlandscape level (e.g., through an ecological classification system, at the subsection or land -type \nassociation level). \n \n For example, habitat connectivity is enhanced by: \n• Creating habitat corridors and protecting ripar ian management zones (RMZs) (see Glossary) \nbetween habitats; \n• Changes in harvest -patch block (see Glossary) sizes, harvest patterns, and land use changes to \ncreate connectivity among existing patched of habitat; \n• Restoration plantings specifically to increas e connectivity among existing patches of habitat. \n \n6.3.c. Natural cycles that affect the productivity of the forest ecosystem \n \n6.3.c.1. Biological legacies of the forest community are retained at the forest and stand levels, \nconsistent with the objective s of the management plan, including but not limited to: large live and \ndeclining trees, coarse dead wood, logs, snags, den trees, and soil organic matter. \n \n6.3.c.2. Forest management practices maintain soil fertility and organic matter, especially in the A \nhorizon, while minimizing soil erosion and compaction. If degradation of soil quality occurs, as \nindicated by declining fertility or forest health, forest owners or managers modify soil management \ntechniques. \n \nFor example: \n• Primary management objectives shift from commercial production to restoration. \n• Site preparation is minimized. \n• Road system design and construction is upgraded. \n• The lightest practical equipment with the lowest ground pressure is used. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n23 • Whole-tree harvesting is discontinued, and tops are left in the forest. \n• Longer rotations and a diversity of species are used in lieu of artificial fertilization. \n• Processes of natural early succession are allowed or encouraged. \n \n6.3.c.3. Forest management practices maintain or restore aquatic ecosystems, w etlands (including \npeatlands, bogs, and vernal pools), and forested riparian areas (see also Criterion 6.5). \n \n6.3.c.4. Responses (such as salvage) to catastrophic events (such as wildfire, blowdown, and \nepidemics) are limited by ecological constraints. \n \nFor example: \n• Adequate coarse woody debris is maintained. \n• Adequate den trees and snags are maintained. \n• Endemic levels of ‘pest’ populations are allowed before pest control actions are carried out. \n \n6.4. Representative samples of existing ecosystems within the landscape shall be protected in \ntheir natural state and recorded on maps, appropriate to the scale and intensity of operations \nand the uniqueness of the affected resources. \n \nApplicability Note: When forest management activities (including timber harve st) create and maintain \nconditions that emulate an intact, mature forest or other successional phases that may be under -\nrepresented in the landscape, the management system that created those conditions may be used to \nmaintain them, and the area may be cons idered as a representative sample for the purposes of meeting \nthis criterion. \n \nA system of ecologically viable representative samples is designated to serve one or more of three \npurposes: (1) to establish and/or maintain an ecological reference condition, (2) to create or maintain \nan under -represented ecological condition (e.g., successional phases of a forest type or plant \ncommunity, see Glossary), or (3) to protect a feature that is sensitive, rare, or unique in the landscape. \nAreas serving the purposes of (1) and (2) may move across the landscape as under -represented \nconditions change, or may be fixed in area and manipulated to maintain the desired conditions. Areas \nserving the purposes of (3) are fixed in location. \n \nForests of all sizes may be conduc ive to protection of fixed features, such as rock outcrops and bogs. \nMedium -sized and large forests may be more conducive to the maintenance of successional phases and \ndisturbance patterns than small forests. \n \nThe goal of Criterion 6.4 is to achieve a sys tem of protected representative samples of existing \necosystems within the landscape. This may be accomplished by the establishment of a system of \nprotected areas within a single ownership, or through a combination of ownerships (certified or not) \nacross t he landscape. \n \nIn light of their size, location, or statutory mandates, public forests and large private forests may bear \na special obligation to provide for a system of representative samples of native ecosystems. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n24 Representative samples may be protected solely by the conditions of the certificate and/or through the \nuse of conservation easements or other instruments of long -term protection. \n \n6.4.a. Where existing protected areas within the landscape are not of a size and configuration to serve \nthe purpose s listed in the above Applicability Note, forest owners or managers, whose properties are \nconducive to the establishment of such ecologically viable areas, designate them. The size, extent, and \narrangement of on -site and off -site (i.e., on and off of the certified forest) representative sample areas \nare designated, documented, and justified. \n \n For example: \n• Management plans address the spatial relationships between or among representative samples, \nprotected areas, and managed areas and may include gap anal ysis. \n• Forest owners or managers collaborate with state natural heritage programs; public agencies; \nregional, landscape, and watershed planning efforts; universities; and other entities to identify \nrepresentative sample areas. \n \n6.4.b. Large private and pu blic forest owners or managers use or carry out an analysis to evaluate the \nextent to which representative samples of existing ecosystems are adequately protected in the \nlandscape. The size and extent of representative samples on public lands are determin ed through a \nmanagement planning process that includes public input (see also Indicator 4.4.e). \n \n6.4.c. The process and rationale used to determine the size and extent of representative samples are \ndescribed in the public summary of the certificate. \n \n6.4.d. Where areas are under -represented in which natural disturbance may occur unconstrained, large, \ncontiguous public forests (see Glossary) create and maintain representative system of protected areas to \naccommodate such acts of nature. \n \n6.5. Written guid elines shall be prepared and implemented to control erosion; minimize forest \ndamage during harvesting, road construction, and all other mechanical disturbances; and to \nprotect water resources . \n \nNote: The Lakes States -Central Hardwoods Regional Certificati on Standards cover a diverse \nlandscape - from prairie to glaciated Northern lands to unglaciated forests in the South. Within this \nregion, all States have developed best management practice guidelines specific to their ecological \nconditions (see Appendix A). These locally developed guidelines serve as the base requirement for \nimplementation of this standard. \n \n6.5.a. A set of forestry best management practices (BMPs), approved by the state forestry agency or \notherwise appropriate jurisdiction (e.g., BIA), that address water quality and soil erosion is adhered to \n(see also 1.1.b). These guidelines may include provisions on riparian management zones (RMZs), \nskidding, access roads, site preparation, log landings, stream crossings, disturbance of sensitive si tes, \nand wetlands. \n \n6.5.b. At a minimum, implementation of BMPs and other resource protection measures will result in \nthe following: \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n25 • Logging and Site Preparation \n \nLogging operations and construction of roads and skid trails are conducted only during peri ods of \nweather when soil is least susceptible to compaction, surface erosion, or sediment transport into \nstreams and other bodies of water. \n \nFor example: \n• Operations are carried out when soils are either dry enough or frozen enough to minimize \ndisturbance and compaction. \n• Vehicular access to roads is controlled to limit soil erosion and other forest damage. \n \nLogging damage to regeneration and residual trees is minimized during harvest operations. \n \nSilvicultural techniques and logging equipment vary with slo pe, erosion hazard rating, and/or soil \ninstability with the goal of minimizing soil disturbance. Areas that exhibit an extreme risk of \nlandslide are excluded from management activities that may precipitate landslides. \n \nNote: \"Extreme risk\" is a legally bi nding term in some states. \n \nPlans for site preparation specify the following mitigations to minimize impacts to the forest \nresources: \n(1) Slash is concentrated only as much as necessary to achieve the goals of site preparation and \nthe reduction of fuels to mod erate or low levels of fire hazard. \n(2) Top soil disturbance and scarification of soils is limited to the minimum necessary to \nachieve successful regeneration of desired species. \n \n• Transportation System (including permanent and temporary haul roads, skid t rails, and \nlandings) \n \nThe transportation system is designed, constructed, maintained, and/or reconstructed to minimize \nthe extent of the road network and its potential cumulative adverse effects. \n \nFor example: \n• Road density is minimized. \n• Displacement of soi l and the sedimentation of streams, as well as impacts to water quality, are \nminimized. \n• Patches of habitat and migration corridors are conserved as much as possible. \n• The integrity of riparian management zones (see Glossary) and buffers (see Glossary) surro unding \nother valuable ecological elements (e.g., wetlands, habitat for sensitive species, and interior old -\ngrowth forest) is conserved. \n \nAccess to temporary and permanent roads is controlled to minimize significant adverse impacts to \nsoil and biota while a llowing legitimate access, as addressed by Principles 3 and 4 and identified in \nthe management plan. \n \nFor example: Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n26 • Roads without a weather resistant surface (e.g., soil, dirt, or native -surfaced roads) are used only \nduring periods of weather when condition s are favorable to minimize road damage, surface erosion, \nand sediment transport. \n• Vehicle access is restricted on roads not immediately necessary for management purposes. \n \nFailed drainage structures or other areas of active erosion caused by roads and ski d trails are identified, \nand measures are taken to correct the drainage problems and stabilize erosion. \n \n• Stream and Water Quality Protection \n \nStream crossings are located and constructed in a way that minimizes fragmentation of aquatic \nhabitat (see Glossar y) and protects water quality. \n \nFor example: \n• Crossings of riparian management zones are kept to a minimum. \n• Stream crossings are perpendicular to the waterway. \n• Culverts allow free passage of aquatic organisms. \n \n• Visual and Aesthetic Considerations \n \nForest ow ners or managers limit and/or reduce negative impacts on visual quality caused by forest \nmanagement operations. \n \n6.6. Management systems shall promote the development and adoption of environmentally \nfriendly non -chemical methods of pest management and st rive to avoid the use of chemical \npesticides. World Health Organization Type 1A and 1B and chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides; \npesticides that are persistent, toxic or whose derivatives remain biologically active and \naccumulate in the food chain beyond th eir intended use; as well as any pesticides banned by \ninternational agreement, shall be prohibited. If chemicals are used, proper equipment and \ntraining shall be provided to minimize health and environmental risks. \n \n6.6.a. Forest owners and managers dem onstrate compliance with FSC Policy paper: “Chemical \nPesticides in Certified Forests, Interpretation of the FSC Principles and Criteria, July 2002” (available \nat http://www.fsc.org/en/w hats_new/documents/Docs_cent/2 ) and comply with prohibitions and/or \nrestrictions on World Health Organization Type 1A and 1B and chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides; \npesticides that are persistent, toxic or whose derivatives remain biologically active and accumulate in \nthe food chain beyond their intended use; as well as any pesticides banned by international agreement. \n \n6.6.b. Forest owners or managers employ silvicultural systems, integrated pest management, and \nstrategies for controlling vegetation that minimize negative environmental effects. Non -chemical \ntechniques are preferred in the implementation of these strategies. \n \nFor example, components of silvicultural systems, integrated pest management, and strategies to control \nvegetation may include: \n• creation and maintenance of habitat that discourages pest outbreaks \n• creation and maintenance of habitat that encourages natural predators \n• evaluation of pest populations and establishment of action thresholds \n• diversification of species composition (see Gloss ary) and structure Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n27 • use of low impact mechanical methods \n• use of prescribed fire \n \n6.6.c. Forest owners or managers develop written strategies for the control of pests as a component of \nthe management plan (see Criterion 7.1). \n \n6.6.d. If chemicals are applie d, the most environmentally safe and efficacious chemicals are used. \nChemicals are narrowly targeted, and minimize effects on non -target species. \n \n6.6.e. Chemicals are used only where they pose no threat to supplies of domestic water, aquatic \nhabitats, or Rare species or plant community types. \n \n6.6.f. If chemicals are used, a written prescription is prepared that describes the risks and benefits of \ntheir use and the precautions that workers will employ. \n \n6.6.g. If chemicals are used, the effects are m onitored and the results are used for adaptive \nmanagement. Records are kept of pest occurrences, control measures, and incidences of worker \nexposure to chemicals. \n \n6.7. Chemicals, containers, liquid and solid non -organic wastes including fuel and oil sha ll be \ndisposed of in an environmentally appropriate manner at off -site locations. \n \n6.7.a. In the event of a spill of hazardous material, forest owners or managers immediately contain the \nmaterial, report the spill as required by applicable regulations, a nd engage qualified personnel to \nperform the appropriate removal and remediation. \n \n6.7.b. Waste lubricants, anti -freeze, containers, and related trash are stored in a leakproof container \nuntil they are transported to an approved off -site disposal site. \n \n For example: \n• Management operations incorporate resource recycling and reuse programs when they are \navailable. \n \n6.7.c. Broken or leaking equipment and parts are repaired or removed from the forest. \n \n6.7.d. Equipment is parked away from riparian manageme nt zones, sinkholes, or supplies of ground \nwater. \n \n \n6.8. Use of biological control agents shall be documented, minimized, monitored, and strictly \ncontrolled in accordance with national laws and internationally accepted scientific protocols. \nUse of gene tically modified organisms shall be prohibited. \n \nApplicability Note: Genetically improved organisms (e.g., Mendelian crossed) are not considered to be \ngenetically modified organisms (see Glossary), and may be used. The prohibition of genetically \nmodified organisms applies to all organisms, including trees. This Criterion is guided by FSC \nguidelines on GMO’s (http://www.fsc.org/en/whats_new/documents/Docs_cent/2). \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n28 6.8.a. Exotic (i.e., non -indigenous), non -invasive predators or biological control agents are used only \nas part of a pest management strategy for the control of exotic species of plants, pathogens (see \nGlossary), insects, or other animals when other pest control methods are, or can reasonably be expected \nto prove, ineffective. Such use is cont ingent upon peer -reviewed scientific evidence that the agents in \nquestion are non -invasive and are safe for indigenous species because, for example, exotic species can \nhost pathogens that might diminish biodiversity in the forest. \n \n6.9. The use of exotic species shall be carefully controlled and actively monitored to avoid \nadverse ecological impacts. \n \n6.9.a. Except on plantation sites (see also Criterion 10.4), the use of exotic tree species is permitted \nonly in the first successional stages or other sho rt-term stages for the purposes of restoring degraded \necosystems. \n \n6.9.b. The use of exotic species (see Glossary) is contingent on peer -reviewed scientific evidence that \nthe species in question is non -invasive and will not diminish biodiversity. If non -invasive exotic \nspecies are used, the provenance and location of use are documented, and their ecological effects are \nactively monitored. \n \n For example: \n• Non-invasive exotic plants that are sown to control erosion are used only when suitable native \nspecies are not readily available. \n \n6.9.c. Written documentation is maintained for the use of exotic species. \n \n For example: \n• Species mixes, rates, locations, and times of application are all recorded. \n \n6.9.d. Forest owners or managers develop and implement cont rol measures for invasive exotic species. \n \n6.10. Forest conversion to plantations or non -forest land uses shall not occur, except in \ncircumstances where conversion: \na) Entails a very limited portion of the forest management unit; and \nb) Does not occur o n High Conservation Value Forest areas; and \nc) Will enable clear, substantial, additional, secure, long -term conservation benefits \nacross the forest management unit. \n \nApplicability Note: Forest management activities that are part of an approved managemen t plan, \nincluding road construction and habitat restoration (such as creation of openings in the forest for \nwildlife habitat and the maintenance or creation of wetlands or prairies) are not conversions for the \npurposes of this criterion. \n \n6.10.a. Over the life of the ownership, forest to non -forest conversions are limited to the threshold of \n1% of the forest area or 100 acres, whichever is smaller, except that a parcel up to two acres in size \nmay be converted for residential use by the forest owner or mana ger. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n29 6.10.b. When private forestlands are sold, a portion of the proceeds of the sale is reinvested in \nadditional forest lands and/or forest stewardship. \n \nPRINCIPLE #7: MANAGEMENT PLAN \nA management plan -- appropriate to the scale and intensity of the o perations -- shall be written, \nimplemented, and kept up to date. The long -term objectives of management, and the means of \nachieving them, shall be clearly stated. \n \n7.1. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: \n a) Management object ives. \n b) Description of the forest resources to be managed, environmental limitations, land use \nand ownership status, socio -economic conditions, and a profile of adjacent lands. \n c) Description of silvicultural and/or other management system, based on t he ecology of \nthe forest in question and information gathered through resource inventories. \n d) Rationale for rate of annual harvest and species selection. \n e) Provisions for monitoring of forest growth and dynamics. \n f) Environmental safeguards base d on environmental assessments. \n g) Plans for the identification and protection of rare, threatened and endangered species. \n h) Maps describing the forest resource base including protected areas, planned \nmanagement activities and land ownership. \ni) Description and justification of harvesting techniques and equipment to be used. \n \nApplicability Note: The management plan may consist of a variety of documents not necessarily unified \ninto a single planning document but which represents an integrated strategy for managing the forest \nwithin the ecological, economic, and social limitations of the land. The plan includes a description \nand rationale for management elements appropriate to the scale, intensity, and goals of management, \nand may include: \n \nSilvicultu ral systems \nRegeneration strategies \nMaintenance of structural and species diversity \n Pest control (disease, insects, invasive species, and vegetation) \nSoil and water conservation \nMethods and annual rates of harvest, by species and products \nEquipment and personnel needs \nTransportation system \nFire management \nPrescribed fires \nWildfires \n Fish and wildlife and their habitats (including non -game species) \n Non-timber forest products \n Methods and annual rates of harvest, by species and products \n Regeneration strategies \n Socioeconomic issues \n Public access and use Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n30 Conservation of historical and cultural resources \nProtection of aesthetic values \nEmployee and contractor policies and procedures \nCommunity relations \nStakeholder notification \n Public comment process \n For public forests, legal and historic mandates \n American Indian issues \n Protection of legal and customary rights \nProcedures for integrating tribal concerns in forest management \nManagement of sites of special significance \n Special management areas \n High Conservation Value Forests \n Riparian management zone \n Set asides of samples of representative existing ecosystems \n Sensitive, rare, threatened, and endangered species protection \n Other protected areas \nLandscape level analyses and strategies \n \n \n \n7.1.a. Management objectives \n \n7.1.a.1. A written management plan is prepared that includes the landowner's short -term and long -term \ngoals and objectives (ecological, social, and economic). The objectives are specific, achievable, and \nmeasurable. \n \n7.1.a.2. The management plan describes desired future conditions that will meet the long -term goals \nand objectives and that determine the silvicultural system(s) and management activities to be used. \n \n For example: \n• The management plan includes a description of f orest resources to be managed, environmental \nlimitations, the status of land use and ownership, socioeconomic conditions, and a profile of \nadjacent lands. \n• See 7.1.b.1, 7.1.b.2, 7.1.b.3, 7.1.b.4, 7.1.b.5, and 7.1.b.6 for additional examples \n \n7.1.b. Descrip tion of forest resources to be managed, environmental limitations, land use and \nownership status, socioeconomic conditions, and profile of adjacent lands \n \n7.1.b.1. The management plan describes the timber, fish and wildlife, harvested non -timber forest \nproducts, soils, and non -economic forest resources. \n \n7.1.b.2. The management plan includes descriptions of special management areas; sensitive, rare, \nthreatened, and endangered species and their habitats; and other ecologically sensitive features in the \nforest. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n31 7.1.b.3. The management plan includes a description of past land uses and incorporates this \ninformation into the vision, goals, and objectives. \n \n7.1.b.4. The management plan identifies the legal status of the forest and its resources (e.g., ownersh ip, \nusufruct rights (see Glossary), treaty rights, easements, deed restrictions, and leasing arrangements). \n \n7.1.b.5. The management plan identifies relevant cultural and socioeconomic issues (e.g., traditional \nand customary rights of use, access, recrea tional uses, and employment), conditions (e.g., composition \nof the workforce, stability of employment, and changes in forest ownership and tenure), and areas of \nspecial significance (e.g., ceremonial and archeological sites). \n \n7.1.b.6. The management plan incorporates landscape -level considerations within the ownership and \namong adjacent and nearby lands, including major bodies of water, critical habitats, and riparian \ncorridors shared with adjacent ownerships. \n \n7.1.c. Description of silvicultural and/or other management system \n \n7.1.c.1. Silvicultural system(s) and prescriptions are based on the integration of ecological and \neconomic characteristics (e.g., successional processes, soil characteristics, existing species composition \nand structures, desired f uture conditions, and market conditions). (see also sub -Criterion 6.3.a) \n \n7.1.c.2. Prescriptions are prepared prior to harvesting, site preparation, pest control, burning, and \nplanting and are available to people who implement the prescriptions. \n \n7.1.d. Rationale for the rate of annual harvest and species selection \n \n7.1.d.1. Calculations for the harvests of both timber and non -timber products are detailed or referenced \nin the management plan and are based on net growth, yield, stocking, and regeneration data. (see also \n5.6.b) \n \n7.1.d.2. Species selection meets the social and economic goals and objectives of the forest owner or \nmanager and leads to the desired future conditions while maintaining or improving the ecological \ncomposition, structures, and fun ctions of the forest. \n \n7.1.d.3. The management plan addresses potentially disruptive effects of pests, storms, droughts, and \nfires as they relate to allowable cut. \n \n7.1.e. Provisions for monitoring forest growth and dynamics (see also Principle 8) \n \n7.1.e.1. The management plan includes a description of procedures to monitor the forest. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n32 7.1.f. Environmental safeguards based on environmental assessments (see also Criterion 6.1.) \n \n7.1.g. Plans for the identification and protection of rare, threatened, and endangered species. \n(see also Criterion 6.3.) \n \n7.1.h. Maps describing the forest resource base including protected areas, planned management \nactivities, and land ownership. \n \n7.1.h.1. The management plan includes maps of such forest characteristics as : relevant landscape -level \nfactors; property boundaries; roads; areas of timber production; forest types by age class; topography; \nsoils; riparian zones; springs and wetlands; archaeological sites; areas of cultural and customary use; \nlocations of sensitiv e, rare, threatened, and/or endangered species and their habitats; and designated \nHigh Conservation Value Forests. \n \n7.1.i. Description and justification of harvesting techniques and equipment to be used. (see also \nCriterion 6.5) \n \n7.1.i.1. Harvesting ma chinery and techniques are discussed in the management or harvest plan and are \nspecifically matched to forest conditions in order to minimize damage. \n \n7.1.i.2. Conditions for each timber sale are established by a timber sale contract or written harvest \nprescription and accompanying timber sale map. \n \n For example: \n• Timber sale contracts and harvest prescriptions provide detailed specifications of how trees are to be \nharvested. \n \n7.2. The management plan shall be periodically revised to incorporate the re sults of monitoring \nor new scientific and technical information, as well as to respond to changing environmental, \nsocial and economic circumstances. \n \n7.2.a. Operational components of the management plan are reviewed and revised as necessary or at \nleast every 5 years. Components of the long -term (strategic) management plan are revised and updated \nat the end of the planning period or when other changes in the management require it. (see also \nCriterion 8.4) \n \n For example: \n• The rationale for changes in the ma nagement plan is stated in subsequent revisions. \n• Relevant provisions of the management plan are modified in response to such changes as fire, \nmarket conditions, or damage to the road system. \n \n7.3. Forest workers shall receive adequate training and superv ision to ensure proper \nimplementation of the management plans. \n \n7.3.a. The forest owner or manager assures that workers are qualified to implement the management \nplan (see also Criterion 4.2). Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n33 \n For example: \n• Loggers and other operators participate in inf ormal and formal training, such as Forest Industry \nSafety Training Alliance, Game of Logging. \n• Professional foresters and resource managers meet continuing education standards, such as the \nSociety of American Foresters “Certified Forester” program. \n• The fore st owner or manager utilizes directories that either list or are based on worker \nqualifications. \n \n7.3.b. The management plan is understandable, comprehensive, and readily available to field \npersonnel. \n \n7.4. While respecting the confidentiality of informa tion, forest managers shall make publicly \navailable a summary of the primary elements of the management plan, including those listed in \nCriterion 7.1. \n \nApplicability Note: Forest owners or managers of private forests may withhold proprietary \ninformation (e .g., the nature and extent of their forest resource base, marketing strategies, and other \nfinancial information). (see also Criterion 8.5) \n \n7.4.a. A management plan summary that outlines management objectives (from sub -Criterion 7.1.a.), \nwhether on priva te lands or the land pool under a resource manager, is available to the public at a \nreasonable fee. Additional elements of the plan may be excluded, to protect the security of \nenvironmentally sensitive and/or proprietary information. \n \n7.4.b. Managers of public forests make forestry -related information easily accessible (e.g., available on \nwebsites) for public review, including that required by Criterion 7.1. \n \n \nPRINCIPLE #8: MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT \nMonitoring shall be conducted -- appropriate to the sca le and intensity of forest management -- \nto assess the condition of the forest, yields of forest products, chain of custody, management \nactivities and their social and environmental impacts. \n \nApplicability Note: On small and medium -sized forests (see Glo ssary), an informal, qualitative \nassessment may be appropriate. Formal, quantitative monitoring is required on large forests and/or \nintensively managed forests. \n \n8.1. The frequency and intensity of monitoring should be determined by the scale and intensi ty of \nforest management operations, as well as, the relative complexity and fragility of the affected \nenvironment. Monitoring procedures should be consistent and replicable over time to allow \ncomparison of results and assessment of change. \n \n8.1.a. The fr equency of monitoring activities follows the schedule outlined in the management plan. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n34 8.1.b. Monitoring is carried out to assess: \n• The degree to which management goals and objectives have been achieved; \n• Deviations from the management plan; \n• Unexpected ef fects of management activities; \n• Social (see Criterion 4.4) and environmental (see Criterion 6.1) effects of management \nactivities. \n \n8.1.c. Public and large, private land owners or managers take the lead in identifying, initiating, and \nsupporting research efforts to address pertinent ecological questions. Small and medium private \nlandowners or managers use information that has been developed by researchers and other managers. \n \n8.2. Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor, at a \nminimum, the following indicators: \n a) Yield of all forest products harvested. \n b) Growth rates, regeneration and condition of the forest. \n c) Composition and observed changes in the flora and fauna. \nd) Environmental and social impact s of harvesting and other operations \ne) Cost, productivity, and efficiency of forest management \n \n8.2.a. Yield of all forest products harvested \n \n8.2.a.1. The forest owner or manager maintains records of standing inventories of timber and harvest \nvolumes of timber and non -timber species (quality and quantity). \n \n \n For example: \n• Significant unanticipated removal of forest products (e.g., theft and poaching) is monitored and \nrecorded. \n \n8.2.b. Growth rates, regeneration, and condition of the forest \n \n8.2.b.1. An inventory system is established and records are maintained for: \n(1) Timber growth and mortality (for volume control systems); \n(2) Stocking, and regeneration; \n(3) Stand-level and forest -level composition and structure (e.g., by use of tools, such as \necological classification systems); \n(4) Abundance, regeneration, and habitat conditions of non -timber forest products; \n(5) Terrestrial and aquatic features; \n(6) Soil characteristics (e.g., texture, drainage, existing erosion); \n(7) Pest conditions. \n \n8.2.c. Composition and observed changes in the flora and fauna \n \n8.2.c.1. Forest owners or managers periodically monitor the forest for changes in major habitat \nelements and in the occurrence of sensitive, rare, threatened, or endangered species or communities. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n35 8.2.d. Environmental and social impacts of harvesting and other operations \n \n8.2.d.1. The environmental effects of site -disturbing activities are assessed (e.g., road construction and \nrepair, harvesting, and site preparation). \n \n For example: \n• Monitoring for compliance with Best Management Practices is carried out. \n• A monitoring program is in place to assess the condition and environmental impact of the road \nsystem and landings. \n \n8.2.d.2. Creation or maintenance of local jobs and public responses to manage ment activities are \nmonitored. \n \n8.2.d.3. Sites of special significance to American Indians are monitored in consultation with tribal \nrepresentatives (see also Principle 3). \n \n8.2.e. Cost, productivity, and efficiency of forest management \n \n8.2.e.1. Fo rest owners or managers monitor the cost and revenues of management in order to assess \nproductivity and efficiency. \n \n8.3. Documentation shall be provided by the forest manager to enable monitoring and certifying \norganizations to trace each forest product from its origin, a process known as the \"chain of \ncustody.\" \n \nApplicability Note: For chain -of-custody management requirements, see Section 3.6 of Chain of \nCustody Standards, FSC Accreditation Manual. \n \n8.4. The results of monitoring shall be incorporated i nto the implementation and revision of the \nmanagement plan. \n \n8.4.a. Discrepancies between the results of management activities or natural events (i.e. yields, growth, \necological changes) and expectations (i.e. plans, forecasts, anticipated impacts) are a ppraised and taken \ninto account in the subsequent management plan. \n \n8.5. While respecting the confidentiality of information, forest managers shall make publicly \navailable a summary of the results of monitoring indicators, including those listed in Criter ion \n8.2. \n \nApplicability Note: Forest owners or managers of private forests may withhold proprietary \ninformation (e.g., the nature and extent of their forest resource base, marketing strategies, and other \nfinancial information). (see also Criterion 7.4) \n \n8.5.a. A summary outlining the results of monitoring is available to the public at a reasonable fee, \nwhether on private lands or a land pool under a resource manager or group certification. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n36 8.5.b. Managers of public forests make information related to m onitoring easily accessible (e.g., \navailable on websites) for public review. \n \nPRINCIPLE 9 MAINTENANCE OF HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE FORESTS \nManagement activities in high conservation value forests shall maintain or enhance the \nattributes which define such for ests. Decisions regarding high conservation value forests shall \nalways be considered in the context of a precautionary approach. \n \nHigh Conservation Value Forests are those that possess one or more of the following attributes: \na) Forest areas containing globally, regionally or nationally significant: concentrations of \nbiodiversity values (e.g., endemism, endangered species, refugia); and/or large \nlandscape level forests, contained within, or containing the management unit, where \nviable populations of most if not all naturally occurring species exist in natural \npatterns of distribution and abundance \nb) Forest areas that are in or contain rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems \nc) Forest areas that provide basic services of nature in critical situations (e.g., watershed \nprotection, erosion control) \nd) Forest areas fundamental to meeting basic needs of local communities (e.g., \nsubsistence, health) and/or critical to local communities’ traditional cultural identity \n(areas of cultural, ecological, economic o r religious significance identified in \ncooperation with such local communities). \n \nExamples of forest areas that may have high conservation value attributes include, but are not \nlimited to : \n \nCentral Hardwoods: \n· Old growth – (see Glossary) (a) \n· Old forests/m ixed age stands that include trees >160 years old (a) \n· Municipal watersheds –headwaters, reservoirs (c) \n· Rare, Threatened, and Endangered (RTE) ecosystems, as defined by GAP analysis, Natural \nHeritage Inventory, and/or the World Wildlife Fund’s Forest Commun ities of Highest \nConservation Concern, and/or Great Lakes Assessment (b) \n· Intact forest blocks in an agriculturally dominated landscape (refugia) (a) \n· Intact forests >1000 ac (valuable to interior forest species) (a) \n· Protected caves (a, b, or d) \n· Savannas (a, b, c, or d) \n· Glades (a, b, or d) \n· Barrens (a, b, or d) \n· Prairie remnants (a, b, or d) \n \nNorth Woods/Lake States: \n· Old growth – (see Glossary) (a) \n· Old forests/mixed age stands that include trees >120 years old (a) \n· Blocks of contiguous forest, > 500 ac, which h ost RTEs (b) \n· Oak savannas (b) Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n37 · Hemlock -dominated forests (b) \n· Pine stands of natural origin (b) \n· Contiguous blocks, >500 ac, of late successional species, that are managed to create old growth \n(a) \n· Fens, particularly calcareous fens (c) \n· Other non -forest commu nities, e.g., barrens, prairies, distinctive geological land forms, vernal \npools (b or c) \n· Other sites as defined by GAP analysis, Natural Heritage Inventory, and/or the World Wildlife \nFund’s Forest Communities of Highest Conservation Concern (b) \n \nNote: In the Lake States -Central Hardwoods region, old growth (see Glossary) is both rare and \ninvariably an HCVF. \n \nIn the Lake States -Central Hardwoods region, cutting timber is not permitted in old -growth stands or \nforests. \n \nNote: Old forests (see Glossary) may o r may not be designated HCVFs. They are managed to \nmaintain or recruit: (1) the existing abundance of old trees and (2) the landscape - and stand -level \nstructures of old -growth forests, consistent with the composition and structures produced by natural \nprocesses. \n \nOld forests that either have or are developing old -growth attributes, but which have been previously \nharvested, may be designated HCVFs and may be harvested under special plans that account for the \necological attributes that make it an HCVF. \n \nForest management maintains a mix of sub -climax and climax old -forest conditions in the landscape. \n \n9.1. Assessment to determine the presence of the attributes consistent with High Conservation \nValue Forests will be completed, appropriate to scale and inte nsity of forest management. \n \nApplicability Note: Certain information may be withheld from public discussion to protect the \nattributes that may be of High Conservation Value. The level of delineation and consultations required \nis dependent on the scale and intensity of the operation. \n \n9.1.a. Attributes and locations of High Conservation Value Forests are determined by: \n(1) Globally rare, threatened, or endangered features, habitats, or ecosystems that may be present in \nthe forest (suggested sources of informat ion are: The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife \nFund, Conservation International, World Resources Institute); \n(2) Regionally and locally rare, threatened, or endangered features, habitats, or ecosystems that may \nbe present in the forest; culturally and tri bally significant areas; or municipal watersheds that \nmay be present in the landscape and/or certified forest (suggested sources of information \ninclude natural and cultural heritage agencies); \n(3) Appropriate consultations with local and regional scientists an d other stakeholders; \n(4) Public review of proposed HCVF attributes and areas on large -scale and public ownerships (see \nalso 7.4, 4.4.e., 4.4.f.); Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n38 (5) Integration of information from consultations and public review into proposed HCVF \ndelineation; \n(6) Delineation by ma ps and habitat descriptions. \n \n \n9.2. The consultative portion of the certification process must place emphasis on \nthe identified conservation attributes, and options for the maintenance thereof. \n \nNote: FSC understands that Criterion 9.2 is an instruction to Cer tification Bodies and that no \nindicators are required. \n \n9.3. The management plan shall include and implement specific measures that ensure the \nmaintenance and/or enhancement of the applicable conservation attributes consistent with the \nprecautionary appro ach. These measures shall be specifically included in the publicly available \nmanagement plan summary. \n \nApplicability Note: The applicability of the precautionary principle (see Glossary) and the consequent \nflexibility of forest management vary with the s ize, configuration, and tenure of the HCVF: \na) More flexibility is appropriate where an HCV forest is less intact, larger in area, has a \nlarger area -to-perimeter ratio, and its tenure is assured over the long term. \nb) Less flexibility is appropriate where an HCV forest is more intact, covers a smaller area, has \na smaller area -to-perimeter ratio, and future tenure is uncertain, based on social \nconsiderations. \n \n9.3.a. Forest management plans and activities are appropriate for maintaining, enhancing and/or \nrestoring attributes that make the area an HCVF. \n \n For example: \n• Passive management activities are carried out when they maintain, enhance, or restore HCVF \ncharacteristics and/or enlarge the size of the HCVF. \n• When prescribed burns, removal of invasive species , and integrated pest management activities are \ncarried out, they occur in a manner consistent with maintenance, protection and/or restoration of \nHCVF characteristics. \n• When timber harvesting is carried out, it occurs in a manner that is consistent with HCV F \nmaintenance, enhancement, or restoration. \n \n \n9.3.b. Active management in HCVFs is allowed only when it maintains or enhances high \nconservation values. \n \nFor example: \n• Maintenance of old -growth and HCVF attributes may be carried out by: (1) removal of exot ic \nspecies and (2) use of controlled burning. \n \n9.3.c. The management -plan summary includes information about HCVF management without \ncompromising either the confidentiality of the forest owner or manager or environmentally and \nculturally sensitive feature s (see also sub -Criterion 7.1.f). Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n39 9.3.d. Forest owners or managers of HCVFs (forests and/or stands) coordinate conservation efforts \nwith forest owners or managers of other HCVFs in the landscape. \n \n9.4. Annual monitoring shall be conducted to assess the e ffectiveness of the measures employed \nto maintain or enhance the applicable conservation attributes. \n \n9.4.a. Forest owners or managers of small forests may satisfy this requirement with informal \nobservations (see 8.1 and 8.2.). When observations detect changes, the changes are documented. \n \n9.4.b. Forest owners or managers of mid -sized and large forests monitor activities within and adjacent \nto HCVFs that may affect HCVF attributes (see Criteria 7.2, 8.1 and 8.2). Monitoring is adequate to \ntrack changes in HCV attributes, and may include informal observations. When monitoring detects \nchanges to HCV attributes, the changes are documented. \n \n \nPRINCIPLE # 10: PLANTATIONS \nPlantations shall be planned and managed in accordance with Principles and Criteria 1 - 9, and \nPrinciple 10 and its Criteria. While plantations can provide an array of social and economic \nbenefits, and can contribute to satisfying the world's needs for forest products, they should \ncomplement the management of, reduce pressures on, and promo te the restoration and \nconservation of natural forests. \n \nApplicability note: Plantations are forest areas lacking most of the principal characteristics and key \nelements of native ecosystems, as a result of such human activities as planting, sowing, or inte nsive \nsilvicultural treatments like short -term rotations and short -term coppice systems (see Glossary)(see \nCriterion 6.9 for use of exotics). \n \nPlanting, seeding, and coppicing do not necessarily result in plantations. \nNon-forest land being afforested be comes a plantation or a managed natural forest based on the \nowner’s goals and objectives for the land in question as well as the development of its attributes. \n \n10.1. The management objectives of the plantation, including natural forest conservation and \nrestoration objectives, shall be explicitly stated in the management plan, and clearly \ndemonstrated in the implementation of the plan. \n \nNote: The Working Group considers that this criterion is sufficiently explicit and measurable, so does \nnot require indic ators. \n \n10.2. The design and layout of plantations should promote the protection, restoration and \nconservation of natural forests, and not increase pressures on natural forests. Wildlife corridors, \nstreamside zones and a mosaic of stands of different age s and rotation periods shall be used in \nthe layout of the plantation, consistent with the scale of the operation. The scale and layout of \nplantation blocks shall be consistent with the patterns of forest stands found within the natural \nlandscape. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n40 10.2.a. Plantation layout minimizes soil degradation and erosion and protects soil and water quality by \naccounting for slope, aspect, erodibility, and movement of surface water (see also Criterion 6.5). \n \n10.2.b. Plantations are managed and integrated into the surrounding landscape in order to improve \nnatural habitats. \n \n For example: \n• Plans for and methods of habitat restoration are determined by the spatial patterns of the forest, as \nwell as by other relevant ecological factors in the landscape. \n• Landowners or ma nagers collaborate with other landowners or managers in the landscape. \n \n10.2.c. For plantation harvests larger than forty acres lacking within -stand retention, the size of the \nopening is justified by credible scientific analysis. \n \n10.2.d. Plantations m ay be re -established on existing plantation sites (see also Criterion 10.5.a.), \nprovided they are consistent with the management plan. They may be established on agricultural \nlands in historically forested areas (see also Criterion 6.10). \n \n10.2.e. Regene ration in previously harvested areas reaches a mean height of at least ten feet or \nachieves canopy closure (see Glossary) before adjacent areas are harvested, unless an earlier harvest \ncan be justified by credible scientific analysis. Forest buffers betwee n harvest units are arranged to \nallow contiguous populations of native species. \n \n For Example: \n• An earlier harvest may be justified in specific habitats on the basis of wildlife management \nconsiderations. \n \n10.3. Diversity in the composition of plantations is preferred, so as to enhance economic, \necological and social stability. Such diversity may include the size and spatial distribution of \nmanagement units within the landscape, number and genetic composition of species, age classes \nand structures. \n \n10.3.a. Forests containing plantations are managed to create and maintain structural and species \ndiversity that results in viable wildlife habitat and long -term soil maintenance and replenishment. \n \n10.3.b. Plantation -management activities are planned to genera te and maintain long -term employment. \n \n10.4. The selection of species for planting shall be based on their overall suitability for the site \nand their appropriateness to the management objectives. In order to enhance the conservation \nof biological divers ity, native species are preferred over exotic species in the establishment of \nplantations and the restoration of degraded ecosystems. Exotic species, which shall be used only \nwhen their performance is greater than that of native species, shall be carefull y monitored to \ndetect unusual mortality, disease, or insect outbreaks and adverse ecological impacts. \n \nApplicability Note: See FSC guidelines regarding Criterion 6.8 for use of GMO’s and see Criterion \n6.9 for allowable use of exotic species. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n41 \n10.4.a. T he use of exotic plant species (see Glossary) is contingent on peer -reviewed scientific \nevidence that the species in question is neither invasive nor a threat to the indigenous biodiversity. If \nnon-invasive exotic species of plants are used, their provena nce and location of use are documented, \nand their ecological effects are actively monitored. \n \n10.4.b. The genetic composition of plantations is suitable for local conditions and is managed for \ndiversity to avoid infestations of pests. \n \n10.5. A proportio n of the overall forest management area, appropriate to the scale of the \nplantation, shall be managed so as to restore the site to a natural forest cover. \n \n10.5.a. The ratio of plantations to natural and semi -natural forests (see Glossary), as well as th eir \nspatial distribution, maintains and/or restores the landscape to a condition that includes a diversity of \ncommunity types, wildlife habitats, and ecological functions similar to a mosaic of native forests. \n \n10.5.b. On land converted from non -forest u ses to forest plantation uses, a percentage of the total area \nowned in the landscape is maintained as and/or restored to natural and semi -natural forest cover. The \nminimum percentage plantation area that is maintained in semi -natural or natural forest is: \n - for 100 acres or less, at least 10 percent. \n - for 101 to 1,000 acres, at least 15 percent. \n- for 1,001 to 10,000 acres, at least 20 percent. \n - for > 10,000 acres, at least 25 percent. \n \n10.5.c. On currently forested land, up to 30% of the area ma y be managed as plantations (see \nGlossary). This percentage is reduced to 15% over a 50 -year period. \n \n10.5.d. Areas of forest and/or plantation to be restored to natural and semi -natural conditions are \nchosen through a landscape analysis that focuses o n enhancing ecological integrity and habitat \nconnectivity. \n \nFor example: \n• Areas that are best suited for such restoration include riparian areas, migration corridors between \nareas of existing natural forest, and unstable slopes. \n \n10.6. Measures shall be t aken to maintain or improve soil structure, fertility, and biological \nactivity. The techniques and rate of harvesting, road and trail construction and maintenance, \nand the choice of species shall not result in long term soil degradation or adverse impacts on \nwater quality, quantity or substantial deviation from stream course drainage patterns. \n \nNote: The Working Group considers that this criterion is sufficiently explicit and measurable, so does \nnot require indicators. \n \n10.7. Measures shall be taken to p revent and minimize outbreaks of pests, diseases, fire and \ninvasive plant introductions. Integrated pest management shall form an essential part of the \nmanagement plan, with primary reliance on prevention and biological control methods rather Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n42 than chemica l pesticides and fertilizers. Plantation management should make every effort to \nmove away from chemical pesticides and fertilizers, including their use in nurseries. The use of \nchemicals is also covered in Criteria 6.6 and 6.7. \n \nNote: The Working Group c onsiders that this criterion is sufficiently explicit and measurable, so does \nnot require indicators. \n \n10.8. Appropriate to the scale and diversity of the operation, monitoring of plantations shall \ninclude regular assessment of potential on -site and off -site ecological and social impacts, (e.g., \nnatural regeneration, effects on water resources and soil fertility, and impacts on local welfare \nand social well -being), in addition to those elements addressed in Principles 8, 6 and 4. No \nspecies should be plan ted on a large scale until local trials and/or experience have shown that \nthey are ecologically well -adapted to the site, are not invasive, and do not have significant \nnegative ecological impacts on other ecosystems. Special attention will be paid to soci al issues of \nland acquisition for plantations, especially the protection of local rights of ownership, use or \naccess. \n \nNote: The Working Group considers that this criterion is sufficiently explicit and measurable, so does \nnot require indicators. \n \n10.9. Pl antations established in areas converted from natural forests after November 1994 \nnormally shall not qualify for certification. Certification may be allowed in circumstances where \nsufficient evidence is submitted to the certification body that the manager /owner is not \nresponsible directly or indirectly of such conversion. \n \nNote: The Working Group considers that this criterion is sufficiently explicit and measurable, so does \nnot require indicators \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n43 \nGLOSSARY \n \nTerms Specific to Lake States Central -Hardwood Regional Certification Standards \n \nAge class: Intervals (commonly 10 years) into which the age range of a tree crop is divided; also \nthe trees falling into such an interval. \n \n Allottee(s): Person(s) holding an Indian allotment on a property. An In dian allotment is private \nland owned by one or more individuals (rather than a tribe) but held in trust by the federal \ngovernment. \n \nAquatic habitat: Habitat that occurs in free, available water (as opposed to water that is \nunavailable for habitat). \n \nBuffer: A strip of vegetation that is left or managed to reduce the impact of a treatment or action \nin one area on another. \n \nCanopy: The more or less continuous cover of branches and foliage formed collectively by the \ncrowns of adjacent trees and other woo dy growth. \n \nCanopy closure: The progressive reduction of space among tree crowns as they spread laterally. \n \nCommunity: A group of one or more populations of plants and/or animals in a common spatial \narrangement; an ecological term used in a broad sense t o include groups of various sizes and \ndegrees of integration. \n \nCommunity type: A generalized category comprising a number of similar units or stands of \nvegetation that also include animals. \n \nConfiguration: The shape or outline of a forest stand or plant community; the degree of \nirregularity in the edge among forest stands or communities; varying from simple to mosaic. \n \nCredible Scientific Analyses : Scientific opinions supported by data and explanations in articles \npublished in peer -reviewed professional journals that deal with the natural or social sciences and \njudged to be relevant to the matter in question. Scientific credibility, as it applies to this standard, is \nbased on a body of scientific work and on the judgment of experienced professionals. \n \nCumulative impact: The sum of impacts resulting from forest management, in a time frame as far \ninto the past as data and information allow. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n44 Endangered species: A species officially designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the \nNational Marine Fi sheries Service as having its continued existence threatened over all or a \nsignificant portion of its range because its habitat is threatened with destruction, drastic \nmodification, or severe curtailment or because of overexploitation, disease, predation, or other \nfactors. \n \nErosion: The displacement of soil from one place to another by any means, such as water, wind, \ngravity, logging, and road building. \n \nEven-aged management: A system of forest management in which stands are produced or \nmaintained with re latively minor differences in age. \n \nExotic plant species : For the purpose of these standards, exotic species of plants are those that \nmeet one of the two following definitions: \n1) They do not occur naturally in temperate or sub -tropical North America, or \n2) They occur naturally in temperate or sub -tropical North America, but come from a forest \ncategory that is different from the certified forest. (Kuchler, A.W. 1975. Potential natural \nvegetation of the conterminous United States (map). Second edition. Ame rican Geographical \nSociety. New York. [Scale: 1:3,168,000]) \n \nKuchler has divided the nation's forests into six categories: Eastern needle leaf, broad leaf, and \nmixed forests; and Western needle leaf, broad leaf, and mixed forests. Needle -leaf trees with a \nnative range in eastern forest may be planted in eastern needle -leaf and mixed forests. Broad -leaf \ntrees with a native range in eastern forests may be planted in eastern broad -leaf and mixed forests. \nNeedle-leaf trees with a native range in western fore sts may be planted in western -needle leaf and \nmixed forests. Broad -leaf trees with a native range in western forests may be planted in western \nbroad-leaf and mixed forests. \n \nForest: (A) The property or portions of a property that is under certificate or being assessed for \ncertification; the corresponding FSC International nomenclature is “Defined Forest Area.” (B) \nGenerally, an ecosystem characterized by tree cover; more particularly, a plant community \npredominantly of trees and other woody vegetation th at is growing closely together. \n \nHarvest block: A forest stand or part of a stand that is managed as a single unit for on -the-ground \n(e.g., thinning, harvest, planting) purposes. \n \nIntegrity: The state of being unimpaired; soundness; completeness; unity. \n \nIntensive forestry: The practice of forestry to obtain a high level of volume of wood products per \nunit of area; accomplished through the application of the best techniques of silviculture and \nmanagement. \n \nLarge forest: A forest that is at least 50,000 ac res in size. \n \nManaged forest: A forest that is managed to accomplish specified objectives. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n45 \nMid-Sized Forest: A forest between 5,000 and 50,000 acres in size. \n \nNutrient cycling: The circulation of elements, such as nitrogen and carbon, via specific path ways \nfrom abiotic to biotic portions of the environment and back again; all mineral and nutrient cycles \ninvolving humans, animals, and plants —such as the carbon cycle, phosphorous cycle, and nitrogen \ncycle. \n \nOld forest: Forests that demonstrate old -growth characteristics but which have been previously \nharvested. \n \nOld-growth: A stand or forest that demonstrates old -growth characteristics and is unroaded or \nlightly roaded, with no evidence of previous logging. \n \nPathogen: Any agent that causes disease, espec ially microorganisms, such as bacteria or fungi. \n \nPlant community: A vegetative complex unique in its combination of plants; occurs in particular \nlocations under particular influences; a reflection or integration of the environmental influences on \nthe site, such as soils, temperature, elevation, solar radiation, slope, aspect, and rainfall; denotes a \ngeneral kind of climax vegetation, such as white pine, hemlock, or hard maple, from which several \nplant community types may be derived on the basis of charact eristic lesser vegetation. \n \nPublic land: Any land, including public forestland, held in government ownership in trust for the \ncitizens of a city, county, state, or nation. \n \nRefugium : A small island of habitat in which a species can survive and from whic h it can \ndisperse when the surrounding habitat becomes suitable for it to live in. \n \nRestoration : The process of modifying a habitat or ecosystem to introduce or reintroduce \ncomposition, structures, and functions that are native to the site. \n \nRiparian zone : An area identified by the presence of vegetation that requires free or unbound \nwater or conditions more moist than normally found in the area. \n \n. \n \nSediment: Material suspended in liquid or air; the deposition of that material onto a surface \nunderlying this liquid or air. \n \nSemi-natural forest : A forest ecosystem containing many of the characteristics of native \necosystems. Semi -natural forests exhibit a history of human disturbance (e.g., harvesting or other \nsilvicultural activities) and make up a consi derable percentage of the managed and unmanaged \nforestland in the Lake States -Central Hardwoods region. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n46 Silviculture: The art of producing and tending a forest by manipulating its establishment, \ncomposition, and growth to best fulfill the objectives of t he owner. This may, or may not, include \ntimber production. \n \nShort rotation coppice systems: Harvest systems that are typically perpetuated long -term in \nwhich only a few characteristics of an indigenous ecosystem remain. \n \nSlope: The incline of the land su rface measured in degrees from the horizontal or in a percent as \ndetermined by the number of units of change in elevation per 100 of the same measurement units; \nalso characterized by the compass direction in which it faces. \n \nSmall forest : . A forest le ss than or equal to 5,000 acres, except for the purposes of FSCUS’s Family \nForest Program (SLIMF) Streamlined Certification Procedures (FSC -POL-20-101 at \nhttp://www.fscus.org/documents/) under which a small forest is defined as less than or equal to 2,470 acres. \n \nSnag: A standing dead tree from which the leaves and most of the limbs have fallen. \n \nSoil: Earth material so modified by physical, chemical, and biological agents that it will support \nrooted plants (American Geological Institute 1962). \n \nSpecies: A unit of classification of plants and animals that consists of the largest and most \ninclusive array of sexually reproducing and cross -fertilizing individuals that share a common gene \npool; the most inclusive Mendelian population. \n \nSpecies composition: The species that occur on a site or in a successional or vegetative stage of a \nplant community. \n \nStand: Plant communities, particularly of trees, sufficiently uniform in composition, constitution, \nage, spatial arrangement, or condition so as to be distingu ished from adjacent communities; also \nmay delineate a silvicultural or management entity. \n \nStructural diversity: The diversity in a plant community resulting from the variety of physical \nforms of the plants within the community (such as the layering or ti ering of the canopy of a forest \nfrom the ground -level to the tops of the tallest trees). \n \nTenure: Socially defined agreements held by individuals or groups, recognized by legal statutes or \ncustomary practice, regarding the \"bundle of rights and duties\" of ownership, holding, access, \nand/or usage of a particular land unit or the associated resources therein (such as individual trees, \nplant species, water, minerals, etc). \n \nThreatened species: Any species that is likely to become endangered within the forese eable future \nthroughout all or a significant portion of its range. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n47 Use rights: Rights for the use of forest resources that can be defined by local custom, mutual \nagreements, or prescribed by other entities holding access rights. These rights may restrict the use \nof particular resources to specific levels of consumption or particular harvesting techniques. \n \nUsufruct: The right to use property not owned by the user, with the proviso that the condition or \nquality is not degraded by its use \n \nWater quality: The quality of water determined by a series of standard parameters including: \nturbidity, temperature, bacterial count, pH, and dissolved oxygen. \n \nWoody debris: All woody material, from whatever source, that is dead and lying on the forest \nfloor. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n48 \nTerms a s defined in FSC International Principles and Criteria \n \nBiological diversity: The variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, \nterrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are a \npart; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. (see Convention on \nBiological Diversity, 1992) \n \nBiological diversity values: The intrinsic, ecological, genetic, social, economic, scientific, \neducational, cultural, recreat ional and aesthetic values of biological diversity and its components. \n(see Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992) \n \nBiological control agents: Living organisms used to eliminate or regulate the population of other \nliving organisms. \n \nChain of custody: The channel through which products are distributed from their origin in the \nforest to their end -use. \n \nChemicals: The range of fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, and hormones, which are used in \nforest management. \n \nCriterion (pl. Criteria): A mea ns of judging whether or not a Principle (of forest stewardship) has \nbeen fulfilled. \n \nCustomary rights: Rights, which result from a long series of habitual or customary actions, \nconstantly repeated, which, have, by such repetition and by uninterrupted ac quiescence, acquired \nthe force of a law within a geographical or sociological unit. \n \nEcosystem: A community of all plants and animals and their physical environment, functioning \ntogether as an interdependent unit. \n \nEndangered species: Any species that i s in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant \nportion of its range. \n \nExotic species: An introduced species not native or endemic to the area in question. \n \nForest integrity: The composition, dynamics, functions and structural attributes of a natural \nforest. \n \nForest management/manager: The people responsible for the operational management of the \nforest resource and of the enterprise, as well as the management system and structure, and the \nplanning and field operations. \n \nGenetically modified organisms: Biological organisms which have been induced by various \nmeans to consist of genetic structural changes. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n49 \nHigh Conservation Value Forests: High Conservation Value Forests are those that possess one or \nmore of the following attributes: \na) fores t areas containing globally, regionally or nationally significant concentrations of \nbiodiversity values (e.g., endemism, endangered species, refugia); and/or large landscape level \nforests, contained within, or containing the management unit, where viable p opulations of most if \nnot all naturally occurring species exist in natural patterns of distribution and abundance \nb) forest areas that are in or contain rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems \nc) forest areas that provide basic services of nature in cr itical situations (e.g., watershed protection, \nerosion control) \nd) forest areas fundamental to meeting basic needs of local communities (e.g., subsistence, health) \nand/or critical to local communities’ traditional cultural identity (areas of cultural, eco logical, \neconomic or religious significance identified in cooperation with such local communities). \n \nIndigenous lands and territories: The total environment of the lands, air, water, sea, sea -ice, \nflora and fauna, and other resources which indigenous peo ples have traditionally owned or \notherwise occupied or used. (Draft Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Part VI) \n \nIndigenous peoples: \"The existing descendants of the peoples who inhabited the present territory \nof a country wholly or partial ly at the time when persons of a different culture or ethnic origin \narrived there from other parts of the world, overcame them and, by conquest, settlement, or other \nmeans reduced them to a non -dominant or colonial situation; who today live more in conform ity \nwith their particular social, economic and cultural customs and traditions than with the institutions \nof the country of which they now form a part, under State structure which incorporates mainly the \nnational, social and cultural characteristics of oth er segments of the population which are \npredominant.\" (Working definition adopted by the UN Working Group on Indigenous Peoples). \n \nLandscape: A geographical mosaic composed of interacting ecosystems resulting from the \ninfluence of geological, topographi cal, soil, climatic, biotic and human interactions in a given area. \n \nLocal laws: Includes all legal norms given by organisms of government whose jurisdiction is less \nthan the national level, such as departmental, municipal and customary norms. \n \nLong ter m: The time -scale of the forest owner or manager as manifested by the objectives of the \nmanagement plan, the rate of harvesting, and the commitment to maintain permanent forest cover. \nThe length of time involved will vary according to the context and eco logical conditions, and will \nbe a function of how long it takes a given ecosystem to recover its natural structure and \ncomposition following harvesting or disturbance, or to produce mature or primary conditions. \n \nNative species: A species that occurs nat urally in the region; endemic to the area. \n \nNatural cycles: Nutrient and mineral cycling as a result of interactions between soils, water, \nplants, and animals in forest environments that affect the ecological productivity of a given site. \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n50 Natural fores t: Forest areas where many of the principal characteristics and key elements of \nnative ecosystems such as complexity, structure and diversity are present, as defined by FSC \napproved national and regional standards of forest management. \n \nNon-timber forest products: All forest products except timber, including other materials \nobtained from trees such as resins and leaves, as well as any other plant and animal products. \n \nOther forest types: Forest areas that do not fit the criteria for plantation or natur al forests and \nwhich are defined more specifically by FSC -approved national and regional standards of forest \nstewardship. \n \nPlantation : Forest areas lacking most of the principal characteristics and key elements of native \necosystems as defined by FSC -approved national and regional standards of forest stewardship, \nwhich result from the human activities of either planting, sowing or intensive silvicultural \ntreatments. \n \nPrecautionary approach: Tool for the implementation of the precautionary principle. \n \nPrecautionary principle: Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full \nscientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost -effective measures to prevent \nenvironmental degradation. (1992 Rio Declaration on Environ ment and Development) \n \nPrinciple : An essential rule or element; in FSC's case, of forest stewardship. \n \nSilviculture: The art and science of producing and tending a forest by manipulating its \nestablishment, composition and growth to best fulfill the obje ctives of the owner. This may, or may \nnot, include timber production. \n \nSuccession: Progressive changes in species composition and forest community structure caused by \nnatural processes (non -human) over time. \n \nTenure: Socially defined agreements held by individuals or groups, recognized by legal statutes or \ncustomary practice, regarding the \"bundle of rights and duties\" of ownership, holding, access and/or \nusage of a particular land unit or the associated resources there within (such as individual trees, \nplant species, water, minerals, etc). \n \nThreatened species: Any species, which is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable \nfuture throughout all or a significant portion of its range. \n \nUse rights: Rights for the use of forest resources that c an be defined by local custom, mutual \nagreements, or prescribed by other entities holding access rights. These rights may restrict the use \nof particular resources to specific levels of consumption or particular harvesting techniques. \n \n Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n51 APPENDIX A. REFE RENCES \n \nBMPs for Erosion Control on Logging Jobs in Ohio. 1992. Silvicultural NPS TAC, \neds. Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry. \n \nField Guide to Best Management Practices for Timber Harvesting in KY. 1990/ Cooperative \nExtension Service. \n \nForest Management Guidelines for MI. 1998. MI Society of American Foresters. \n \nForestry Best Management Practices for Illinois. 2000. Illinois Department of Natural Resources. \nIndiana Logging and Forestry Best Management Practices - BMP Field G uide. September 1999. \nIndiana Department of Natural Resources. \nIndiana Logging and Forestry Best Management Practices: BMP Field Guide. 1999. Forest \nPractices Working Group, eds. Division of Forestry, Indiana Department of Natural Resources. \n \nIowas For estry Best Management Practices. Iowa Department of Natural Resources. \n \nLogger’s Handbook, A Guide to Recommended Logging Practices 1986. 1986. Timber Industry \nCouncil, Ohio Forestry Association. \n \nLogging and Forestry BMPs for Water Quality in IN Field Guide. 1998. Forest Practices Working \nGroup, Division of Forestry, Indiana Department of Natural Resources. \n \nSustaining MN Forest Resources: Voluntary Site Level Guidelines for Landowners, Loggers, and \nResource Managers. 1999. MN Forest Resources Counc il, St. Paul, MN. \n \nWater Quality Management Practices on Forest Land. Michigan Department of Natural Resources \nand Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. \n \nWisconsin’s Forestry Best Management Practices for Water Quality. Pub #FR093. 1995. Bureau \nof Forestry, WI DNR. Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n52 Appendix B \nDescription of the FSC -US Lake States Region \nPrepared by Greg Blomstrom, Forest Analyst \nDecember 19, 2003 \n \nThe FSC -US Lake States region is composed of entire counties in all or portions of the States of \nIllinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio and Wisconsin, within the United States \nof America. Within these states, all of the following counties are within the region. The map on the \nlast page shows the general location of the states and counties within the region. \n \nThe region was defined using a combination of earlier work previously describing the region and \nposted on the FSC -US website, ecosystem boundaries from Ricketts and then intersecting the former \nregional boundaries, ecosystem boundaries and US counties in ArcView. A county was included in the \nregion if more than ½ of the county was within the regional boundary. \n \n Lake States Illinois Adams \nLake States Illinois Bond \nLake States Illinois Boone \nLake States Illinois Brown \nLake States Illinois Bureau \nLake States Illinois Calhoun \nLake States Illinois Carroll \nLake States Illinois Cass \nLake States Illinois Champaign \nLake States Illinois Christian \nLake States Illinois Clark \nLake States Illinois Clay \nLake States Illinois Clinton \nLake States Illinois Coles \nLake States Illinois Cook \nLake States Illinois Crawford \nLake States Illinois Cumberland \nLake States Illinois De Kalb \nLake States Illinois De Witt \nLake States Illinois Douglas \nLake States Illinois Du Page \nLake States Illinois Edgar \nLake States Illinois Edwards \nLake States Illinois Effingham \nLake States Illinois Fayette \nLake States Illinois Ford \nLake States Illinois Fulton \nLake States Illinois Greene \nLake States Illinois Grundy \nLake States Illinois Hancock \nLake States Illinois Henderson \nLake States Illinois Henry \nLake States Illinois Iroquois \nLake States Illinois Jasper \nLake States Illinois Jefferson \nLake States Illinois Jersey \nLake States Illinois Jo Daviess \nLake States Illinois Kane \nLake States Illinois Kankakee \nLake States Illinois Kendall \nLake States Illinois Knox \nLake States Illinois La Salle \nLake States Illinois Lake \nLake States Illinois Lawrence \nLake States Illinois Lee \nLake States Illinois Livingston \nLake States Illinois Logan \nLake States Illinois Macon \nLake States Illinois Macoupin Lake States Illinois Madison \nLake States Illinois Marion \nLake States Illinois Marshall \nLake States Illinois Mason \nLake States Illinois McDonough \nLake States Illinois McHenry \nLake States Illinois McLean \nLake States Illinois Menard \nLake States Illinois Mercer \nLake States Illinois Monroe \nLake States Illinois Montgomery \nLake States Illinois Morgan \nLake States Illinois Moultrie \nLake States Illinois Ogle \nLake States Illinois Peoria \nLake States Illinois Piatt \nLake States Illinois Pike \nLake States Illinois Putnam \nLake States Illinois Richland \nLake States Illinois Rock Island \nLake States Illinois Sangamon \nLake States Illinois Schuyler \nLake States Illinois Scott \nLake States Illinois Shelby \nLake States Illinois St. Clair \nLake States Illinois Stark \nLake States Illinois Stephenson \nLake States Illinois Tazewell \nLake States Illinois Vermilion \nLake States Illinois Wabash \nLake States Illinois Warren \nLake States Illinois Washington \nLake States Illinois Wayne \nLake States Illinois Whiteside \nLake States Illinois Will \nLake States Illinois Winneb ago \nLake States Illinois Woodford \nLake States Indiana Adams \nLake States Indiana Allen \nLake States Indiana Bartholomew \nLake States Indiana Benton \nLake States Indiana Blackford \nLake States Indiana Boone \nLake States Indiana Brown \nLake States Indiana Carroll \nLake States Indiana Cass \nLake States Indiana Clark \nLake States Indiana Clay \nLake States Indiana Clinton Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n53 Lake States Indiana Crawford \nLake States Indiana Daviess \nLake States Indiana De Kalb \nLake States Indiana Dearborn \nLake States Indiana Decatur \nLake States Indiana Delaware \nLake States Indiana Dubois \nLake States Indiana Elkhart \nLake States Indiana Fayette \nLake States Indiana Floyd \nLake States Indiana Fountain \nLake States Indiana Franklin \nLake States Indiana Fulton \nLake States Indiana Gibson \nLake States Indiana Grant \nLake States Indiana Greene \nLake States Indiana Hamilton \nLake States Indiana Hancock \nLake States Indiana Harrison \nLake States Indiana Hendricks \nLake States Indiana Henry \nLake States Indiana Howard \nLake States Indiana Huntington \nLake States Indiana Jackson \nLake States Indiana Jasper \nLake States Indiana Jay \nLake States Indiana Jefferson \nLake States Indiana Jennings \nLake States Indiana Johnson \nLake States Indiana Knox \nLake States Indiana Kosciusko \nLake States Indiana La Porte \nLake States Indiana Lagrange \nLake States Indiana Lake \nLake States Indiana Lawrence \nLake States Indiana Madison \nLake States Indiana Marion \nLake States Indiana Marshall \nLake States Indiana Martin \nLake States Indiana Miami \nLake State s Indiana Monroe \nLake States Indiana Montgomery \nLake States Indiana Morgan \nLake States Indiana Newton \nLake States Indiana Noble \nLake States Indiana Ohio \nLake States Indiana Orange \nLake States Indiana Owen \nLake States Indiana Parke \nLake States Indiana Perry \nLake States Indiana Pike \nLake States Indiana Porter \nLake States Indiana Posey \nLake States Indiana Pulaski \nLake States Indiana Putnam \nLake States Indiana Randolph \nLake States Indiana Ripley \nLake States Indiana Rush \nLake States Indiana Scott \nLake States Indiana Shelby \nLake States Indiana Spencer \nLake States Indiana St. Joseph \nLake States Indiana Starke \nLake States Indiana Steuben \nLake States Indiana Sullivan \nLake States Indiana Switzerland \nLake States Indiana Tippecanoe \nLake States Indiana Tipton \nLake States Indiana Union \nLake States Indiana Vanderburgh \nLake States Indiana Vermillion \nLake States Indiana Vigo \nLake States Indiana Wabash \nLake States Indiana Warren \nLake States Indiana Warrick \nLake States Indiana Washington Lake States Indiana Wayne \nLake States Indiana Wells \nLake States Indiana White \nLake States Indiana Whitley \nLake States Iowa Allamakee \nLake States Iowa Appanoose \nLake States Iowa Clarke \nLake States Iowa Clayton \nLake States Iowa Davis \nLake States Iowa Decatur \nLake States Iowa Des Moines \nLake States Iowa Dubuque \nLake States Iowa Fayette \nLake States Iowa Lee \nLake States Iowa Lucas \nLake States Iowa Marion \nLake States Iowa Monroe \nLake States Iowa Ringgold \nLake States Iowa Van Buren \nLake States Iowa Wapello \nLake States Iowa Wayne \nLake States Iowa Winneshiek \nLake States Michigan Alcona \nLake States Michigan Alger \nLake States Michigan Allegan \nLake States Michigan Alpena \nLake States Michigan Antrim \nLake States Michigan Arenac \nLake States Michigan Baraga \nLake States Michigan Barry \nLake States Michigan Bay \nLake States Michigan Benzie \nLake States Michigan Berrien \nLake States Michigan Branch \nLake States Michigan Calhoun \nLake States Michigan Cass \nLake States Michigan Charlevoix \nLake States Michigan Cheboygan \nLake States Michigan Chippewa \nLake States Michigan Clare \nLake States Michigan Clinton \nLake States Michigan Crawford \nLake States Michigan Delta \nLake States Michigan Dickinson \nLake States Michigan Eaton \nLake States Michigan Emmet \nLake States Michigan Genese e \nLake States Michigan Gladwin \nLake States Michigan Gogebic \nLake States Michigan Grand Traverse \nLake States Michigan Gratiot \nLake States Michigan Hillsdale \nLake States Michigan Houghton \nLake States Michigan Huron \nLake States Michigan Ingham \nLake States Michigan Ionia \nLake States Michigan Iosco \nLake States Michigan Iron \nLake States Michigan Isabella \nLake States Michigan Jackson \nLake States Michigan Kalamazoo \nLake States Michigan Kalkaska \nLake States Michigan Kent \nLake States Michigan Keweenaw \nLake States Michigan Lake \nLake States Michigan Lapeer \nLake States Michigan Leelanau \nLake States Michigan Lenawee \nLake States Michigan Livingston \nLake States Michigan Luce \nLake States Michigan Mackinac \nLake States Michigan Macomb \nLake States Michigan Manistee \nLake States Michigan Marquette \nLake States Michigan Mason \nLake States Michigan Mecosta Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n54 Lake States Michigan Menominee \nLake States Michigan Midland \nLake States Michigan Missaukee \nLake States Michigan Monroe \nLake States Michigan Montcalm \nLake States Michigan Montmorency \nLake States Michigan Muskegon \nLake States Michigan Newaygo \nLake States Michigan Oakland \nLake States Michigan Oceana \nLake States Michigan Ogemaw \nLake States Michigan Ontonagon \nLake States Michigan Osceola \nLake States Michigan Oscoda \nLake States Michigan Otsego \nLake States Michigan Ottawa \nLake States Michigan Presque Isle \nLake States Michigan Roscommon \nLake States Michigan Saginaw \nLake States Michigan Sanilac \nLake States Michigan Schoolcraft \nLake States Michigan Shiawassee \nLake States Michigan St. Clair \nLake States Michigan St. Joseph \nLake States Michigan Tuscola \nLake States Michigan Van Buren \nLake States Michigan Washtenaw \nLake States Michigan Wayne \nLake States Michigan Wexford \nLake States Minnesota Aitkin \nLake States Minnesota Anoka \nLake States Minnesota Becker \nLake States Minnesota Beltrami \nLake States Minnesota Benton \nLake States Minnesota Big Stone \nLake States Minnesota Blue Earth \nLake States Minnesota Brown \nLake States Minnesota Carlton \nLake States Minnesota Carver \nLake States Minnesota Cass \nLake States Minnesota Chippewa \nLake States Minnesota Chisago \nLake States Minnesota Clay \nLake States Minnesota Clearwater \nLake States Minnesota Cook \nLake States Minnesota Crow Wing \nLake States Minnesota Dakota \nLake States Minnesota Dodge \nLake States Minnesota Douglas \nLake States Minnesota Fillmore \nLake States Minnesota Goodhue \nLake States Minnesota Grant \nLake States Minnesota Hennepin \nLake States Minnesota Houston \nLake States Minnesota Hubbard \nLake States Minnesota Isanti \nLake States Minnesota Itasca \nLake States Minneso ta Kanabec \nLake States Minnesota Kandiyohi \nLake States Minnesota Kittson \nLake States Minnesota Koochiching \nLake States Minnesota Lac Qui Parle \nLake States Minnesota Lake \nLake States Minnesota Lake of the Woods \nLake States Minnesota Le Sueur \nLake States Minnesota Lyon \nLake States Minnesota Mahnomen \nLake States Minnesota Marshall \nLake States Minnesota McLeod \nLake States Minnesota Meeker \nLake States Minnesota Mille Lacs \nLake States Minnesota Morrison \nLake States Minnesota Nicollet \nLake States Minnesota Norman \nLake States Minnesota Olmsted \nLake States Minnesota Otter Tail Lake States Minnesota Pennington \nLake States Minnesota Pine \nLake States Minnesota Polk \nLake States Minnesota Pope \nLake States Minnesota Ramsey \nLake States Minnesota Red Lake \nLake States Minneso ta Redwood \nLake States Minnesota Renville \nLake States Minnesota Rice \nLake States Minnesota Roseau \nLake States Minnesota Scott \nLake States Minnesota Sherburne \nLake States Minnesota Sibley \nLake States Minnesota St. Louis \nLake States Minnesota Stearns \nLake St ates Minnesota Steele \nLake States Minnesota Stevens \nLake States Minnesota Swift \nLake States Minnesota Todd \nLake States Minnesota Traverse \nLake States Minnesota Wabasha \nLake States Minnesota Wadena \nLake States Minnesota Waseca \nLake States Minnesota Washingt on \nLake States Minnesota Wilkin \nLake States Minnesota Winona \nLake States Minnesota Wright \nLake States Minnesota Yellow Medicine \nLake States Missouri Adair \nLake States Missouri Audrain \nLake States Missouri Barton \nLake States Missouri Bates \nLake States Missouri Boone \nLake States Missouri Buchanan \nLake States Missouri Caldwell \nLake States Missouri Callaway \nLake States Missouri Carroll \nLake States Missouri Cass \nLake States Missouri Chariton \nLake States Missouri Clark \nLake States Missouri Clay \nLake States Missou ri Clinton \nLake States Missouri Cole \nLake States Missouri Cooper \nLake States Missouri Daviess \nLake States Missouri De Kalb \nLake States Missouri Franklin \nLake States Missouri Gasconade \nLake States Missouri Gentry \nLake States Missouri Grundy \nLake States Missouri Harrison \nLake States Missouri Henry \nLake States Missouri Howard \nLake States Missouri Jackson \nLake States Missouri Jasper \nLake States Missouri Jefferson \nLake States Missouri Johnson \nLake States Missouri Knox \nLake States Missouri Lafayette \nLake States Missouri Lawrence \nLake States Missouri Lewis \nLake States Missouri Lincoln \nLake States Missouri Linn \nLake States Missouri Livingston \nLake States Missouri Macon \nLake States Missouri Marion \nLake States Missouri Mercer \nLake States Missouri Moniteau \nLake States Missouri Monroe \nLake States Missouri Montgomery \nLake States Missouri Morgan \nLake States Missouri Osage \nLake States Missouri Pettis \nLake States Missouri Pike \nLake States Missouri Platte \nLake States Missouri Putnam Revised Final Lake States Regional Standard, V2.0 \n11/23/04 \n55 Lake States Missouri Ralls \nLake States Missouri Randolph \nLake States Missouri Ray \nLake States Missouri Saline \nLake States Missouri Schuyler \nLake States Missouri Scotland \nLake States Missouri Shelby \nLake States Missouri St. Charles \nLake States Missouri St. Louis \nLake States Missouri St. Louis City \nLake States Missouri Sullivan \nLake States Missouri Vernon \nLake States Missouri Warren \nLake States Missouri Worth \nLake States Ohio Adams \nLake States Ohio Allen \nLake States Ohio Ashland \nLake States Ohio Ashtabula \nLake States Ohio Auglaize \nLake States Ohio Brown \nLake States Ohio Butler \nLake States Ohio Champaign \nLake States Ohio Clark \nLake States Ohio Clermont \nLake States Ohio Clinton \nLake States Ohio Columbiana \nLake States Ohio Crawford \nLake States Ohio Cuyahoga \nLake States Ohio Darke \nLake State s Ohio Defiance \nLake States Ohio Delaware \nLake States Ohio Erie \nLake States Ohio Fairfield \nLake States Ohio Fayette \nLake States Ohio Franklin \nLake States Ohio Fulton \nLake States Ohio Geauga \nLake States Ohio Greene \nLake States Ohio Hamilton \nLake S tates Ohio Hancock \nLake States Ohio Hardin \nLake States Ohio Henry \nLake States Ohio Highland \nLake States Ohio Holmes \nLake States Ohio Huron \nLake States Ohio Knox \nLake States Ohio Lake \nLake States Ohio Licking \nLake States Ohio Logan \nLake States Ohio Lorain \nLake States Ohio Lucas \nLake States Ohio Madison \nLake States Ohio Mahoning \nLake States Ohio Marion \nLake States Ohio Medina \nLake States Ohio Mercer \nLake States Ohio Miami \nLake States Ohio Montgomery \nLake States Ohio Morrow \nLake States Ohio Ottawa \nLake States Ohio Paulding \nLake States Ohio Pickaway \nLake States Ohio Portage \nLake States Ohio Preble \nLake States Ohio Putnam \nLake States Ohio Richland \nLake States Ohio Ross \nLake States Ohio Sandusky \nLake States Ohio Seneca \nLake States Ohio Shelby \nLake States Ohio Stark \nLake States Ohio Summit \nLake States Ohio Trumbull \nLake States Ohio Union \nLake States Ohio Van Wert \nLake States Ohio Warren Lake States Ohio Wayne \nLake States Ohio Williams \nLake States Ohio Wood \nLake States Ohio Wyandot \nLake States Wisconsin Adams \nLake States Wisconsin Ashland \nLake States Wisconsin Barron \nLake States Wisconsin Bayfield \nLake States Wisconsin Brown \nLake States Wisconsin Buffalo \nLake States Wisconsin Burnett \nLake States Wisconsin Calumet \nLake States Wisconsin Chippewa \nLake States Wisconsin Clark \nLake States Wisconsin Columbia \nLake States Wisconsin Crawford \nLake States Wisconsin Dane \nLake States Wisconsin Dodge \nLake States Wisconsin Door \nLake States Wisconsin Douglas \nLake States Wisconsin Dunn \nLake State s Wisconsin Eau Claire \nLake States Wisconsin Florence \nLake States Wisconsin Fond Du Lac \nLake States Wisconsin Forest \nLake States Wisconsin Grant \nLake States Wisconsin Green \nLake States Wisconsin Green Lake \nLake States Wisconsin Iowa \nLake States Wisconsin Iron \nLake States Wisconsin Jackson \nLake States Wisconsin Jefferson \nLake States Wisconsin Juneau \nLake States Wisconsin Kenosha \nLake States Wisconsin Kewaunee \nLake States Wisconsin La Crosse \nLake States Wisconsin Lafayette \nLake States Wisconsin Langlade \nLake States Wisconsin Lincoln \nLake States Wisconsin Manitowoc \nLake States Wisconsin Marathon \nLake States Wisconsin Marinette \nLake States Wisconsin Marquette \nLake States Wisconsin Menominee \nLake States Wisconsin Milwaukee \nLake States Wisconsin Monroe \nLake States Wisconsin Oconto \nLake States Wisconsin Oneida \nLake States Wisconsin Outagamie \nLake States Wisconsin Ozaukee \nLake States Wisconsin Pepin \nLake States Wisconsin Pierce \nLake States Wisconsin Polk \nLake States Wisconsin Portage \nLake States Wisconsin Price \nLake States Wisconsin Racine \nLake States Wisconsin Richland \nLake States Wisconsin Rock \nLake States Wisconsin Rusk \nLake States Wisconsin Sauk \nLake States Wisconsin Sawyer \nLake States Wisconsin Shawano \nLake States Wisconsin Sheboygan \nLake States Wisconsin St. Cro ix \nLake States Wisconsin Taylor \nLake States Wisconsin Trempealeau \nLake States Wisconsin Vernon \nLake States Wisconsin Vilas \nLake States Wisconsin Walworth \nLake States Wisconsin Washburn \nLake States Wisconsin Washington \nLake States Wisconsin Waukesha \nLake St ates Wisconsin Waupaca \nLake States Wisconsin Waushara \nLake States Wisconsin Winnebago \nLake States Wisconsin Wood \n" }

[ -0.03508010879158974, -0.03931618481874466, 0.034538209438323975, 0.012079192325472832, 0.03997001051902771, 0.027058998122811317, -0.03627908229827881, -0.0027463871520012617, -0.018737830221652985, 0.0357283316552639, -0.008530107326805592, -0.00985738169401884, 0.035989657044410706, 0.013446821831166744, 0.012816782109439373, 0.03519259765744209, 0.06712324917316437, -0.05165715888142586, -0.03659993037581444, 0.0012943431502208114, 0.07855268567800522, 0.04528452455997467, 0.07455487549304962, -0.03075345791876316, 0.023333117365837097, 0.005346816033124924, -0.05212285742163658, -0.05658108368515968, -0.10076040774583817, 0.04839637875556946, 0.03924303501844406, 0.03455193713307381, -0.06369701772928238, 0.029198139905929565, 0.0731734111905098, 0.034679170697927475, 0.023062914609909058, 0.05343891307711601, 0.04576347395777702, 0.003329985309392214, -0.04396118223667145, -0.06325206160545349, 0.06364849209785461, -0.011139941401779652, -0.021709371358156204, -0.012071769684553146, 0.01604413613677025, -0.00580673199146986, 0.02760247327387333, 0.05959201604127884, 0.09166225045919418, 0.06472265720367432, -0.045909710228443146, 0.07208598405122757, 0.040248628705739975, -0.02828405611217022, 0.03321439400315285, -0.023373350501060486, -0.034789055585861206, 0.03334445506334305, -0.07548990100622177, -0.0017902818508446217, 0.034235965460538864, -0.026332063600420952, -0.07377225905656815, -0.028217487037181854, 0.0124320974573493, -0.0055672586895525455, -0.05121142044663429, -0.028065193444490433, 0.043006159365177155, 0.07114411145448685, 0.032370373606681824, -0.07071321457624435, 0.03197048604488373, 0.03394997492432594, 0.1222931444644928, 0.12893253564834595, 0.05752976983785629, -0.1289365589618683, 0.08121949434280396, 0.026973668485879898, 0.047469958662986755, -0.062009699642658234, 0.023912159726023674, -0.02312362566590309, 0.012961480766534805, 0.02751680463552475, 0.018202705308794975, 0.0736277624964714, 0.03097214736044407, -0.02318810671567917, 0.07554753124713898, 0.01606116071343422, 0.02584606595337391, 0.04353206977248192, 0.04499058052897453, -0.020739024505019188, -0.0935223251581192, 0.008212056942284107, 0.02279985323548317, -0.0555616170167923, 0.0469709187746048, -0.04354500398039818, 0.011601945385336876, -0.010736016556620598, 0.01509740762412548, -0.008787360973656178, -0.0379406102001667, -0.04204723984003067, 0.06075383722782135, -0.013853887096047401, -0.020021775737404823, -0.006226955447345972, -0.03298181667923927, -0.011082950979471207, -0.03921398147940636, -0.062161389738321304, 0.09494996070861816, 0.03481552377343178, 0.04219845309853554, 0.0051543982699513435, -0.020732667297124863, -0.0007772588287480175, -0.00561689306050539, -0.07270805537700653, -0.14649058878421783, 2.6244386260175866e-33, 0.01856870763003826, 0.0276547409594059, 0.01467127911746502, -0.05419095978140831, -0.0843050554394722, -0.007965748198330402, 0.051049694418907166, 0.006677698343992233, -0.0298692025244236, -0.010768948122859001, -0.0766884833574295, 0.07186771184206009, -0.013400963507592678, 0.14608442783355713, 0.01932911016047001, -0.10707976669073105, -0.07388581335544586, 0.12035632133483887, 0.019861532375216484, 0.029368409886956215, 0.047664985060691833, -0.07969427853822708, 0.061686109751462936, 0.002342455554753542, 0.10150061547756195, 0.01993442140519619, -0.024223309010267258, 0.01312874536961317, -0.02760443650186062, 0.034190114587545395, -0.024210739880800247, -0.02758537419140339, 0.08847793191671371, -0.07637689262628555, -0.008706011809408665, -0.06536942720413208, -0.007384074851870537, 0.01693132519721985, -0.06860283762216568, -0.09259530901908875, -0.0012029983336105943, 0.06584123522043228, 0.011593412607908249, 0.01617959327995777, -0.02967974729835987, -0.027140960097312927, 0.0546875074505806, 0.011519968509674072, -0.06897762417793274, 0.004294896498322487, 0.0037082387134432793, -0.013997887261211872, -0.09521456062793732, -0.02110769785940647, -0.06946424394845963, -0.0643506571650505, 0.012688358314335346, -0.0240536630153656, 0.01229340024292469, -0.026662366464734077, -0.020353635773062706, -0.040311578661203384, 0.00621286453679204, 0.04137571156024933, 0.018126629292964935, 0.08982477337121964, -0.019976574927568436, 0.06435060501098633, 0.0712638571858406, 0.026771457865834236, -0.03513271361589432, -0.02699827402830124, 0.06370320916175842, 0.0044293650425970554, 0.009451206773519516, -0.023176031187176704, 0.0870867669582367, -0.05582421272993088, 0.030011644586920738, 0.018687615171074867, -0.0325021930038929, -0.011113271117210388, 0.06113329157233238, 0.032695528119802475, 0.0375923328101635, 0.03720112517476082, -0.007210629526525736, 0.02037622034549713, 0.0022813770920038223, -0.036044925451278687, -0.022440634667873383, -0.05572754144668579, -0.003586106700822711, -0.047224998474121094, 0.053758807480335236, -3.4971533663878926e-33, -0.003058528760448098, 0.08956611901521683, 0.028787726536393166, -0.07043298333883286, -0.04507884755730629, -0.024045122787356377, 0.020352298393845558, 0.022679820656776428, 0.011205133982002735, 0.02209046110510826, -0.06515474617481232, 0.002524391980841756, -0.03729762136936188, 0.010266904719173908, -0.10181643068790436, -0.03608594089746475, -0.03217117860913277, -0.021419044584035873, 0.09487927705049515, -0.057597577571868896, -0.010064489208161831, 0.05241037532687187, 0.12124408036470413, 0.07768110930919647, 0.0030743482057005167, 0.054782476276159286, -0.0762283056974411, -0.062296800315380096, 0.0604805126786232, 0.058931633830070496, 0.035449787974357605, -0.07117840647697449, -0.08669357746839523, 0.02747979946434498, -0.040868304669857025, -0.031091727316379547, 0.05457606539130211, -0.024307478219270706, -0.03708536550402641, 0.0163357462733984, 0.10699987411499023, 0.0034405456390231848, -0.03601890057325363, 0.008305320516228676, -0.07026233524084091, -0.023238763213157654, -0.039204686880111694, 0.0014675367856398225, -0.0011743053328245878, -0.10695892572402954, -0.03991464525461197, -0.00614981260150671, -0.07389981299638748, 0.044158075004816055, -0.06680423766374588, 0.09467858821153641, 0.05540047958493233, 0.05751868337392807, 0.01034646574407816, -0.07173839211463928, -0.05491398647427559, 0.06606324762105942, -0.027565134689211845, -0.032975051552057266, 0.005696657579392195, -0.027853257954120636, 0.005053768400102854, 0.0028072332497686148, 0.025074800476431847, 0.026890505105257034, 0.011271345429122448, -0.049712929874658585, -0.016160158440470695, -0.02882886677980423, 0.08276869356632233, 0.05490278825163841, 0.028056874871253967, -0.061884619295597076, -0.019216710701584816, 0.11676373332738876, 0.051024988293647766, -0.0451689176261425, -0.030453186482191086, -0.05179082602262497, 0.0022465926595032215, -0.06128823012113571, 0.025976594537496567, 0.05284736678004265, -0.01784089207649231, 0.08568254113197327, -0.13373035192489624, -0.011590588837862015, -0.010606551542878151, -0.001026580692268908, -0.04637673497200012, -5.057506413663759e-8, 0.014222542755305767, 0.05014141649007797, -0.0448530949652195, 0.017861418426036835, -0.02042010799050331, -0.08840563893318176, -0.07855015248060226, 0.049818601459264755, 0.04510660469532013, 0.0017877540085464716, 0.07304501533508301, 0.02459688112139702, -0.04976425692439079, -0.06425274163484573, -0.12654826045036316, 0.0007109578000381589, -0.0694301649928093, 0.010090959258377552, -0.030726511031389236, -0.060269396752119064, 0.005236656405031681, 0.01272184494882822, -0.11373105645179749, 0.032162271440029144, -0.018282553181052208, 0.04849052429199219, -0.03975236043334007, 0.07504085451364517, 0.02015143260359764, 0.07320243120193481, 0.04266093298792839, 0.00998289231210947, -0.09296855330467224, -0.03025112859904766, 0.03172518312931061, -0.029267271980643272, -0.02579578012228012, -0.0492432676255703, 0.010399850085377693, 0.03594435006380081, -0.02072848193347454, -0.02864646166563034, 0.031614288687705994, -0.005086116027086973, 0.05134021118283272, -0.0015463684685528278, -0.18147620558738708, -0.07495348155498505, 0.009232968091964722, -0.125925213098526, 0.0127980075776577, 0.020716357976198196, -0.06687989085912704, 0.07895422726869583, 0.017209094017744064, 0.0010261965217068791, 0.008792021311819553, -0.02288293093442917, 0.027725324034690857, -0.01518836710602045, -0.01637030392885208, -0.09700343012809753, 0.04211094602942467, -0.01170924212783575 ]

{ "pdf_file": "VOFCKLPGMEN2Y5ZHMM7S6TQ3C6Y5FEWN.pdf", "text": "FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\n-Bill Summary\n \n-Funding Table  \n \nThis supplemental appropriations bill provides over $37.47 billion to support our troops, conduct\nthe war in Afghanistan, continue to drawdown troops in Iraq, and provide non-military\nassistance and build up State Department operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. \n \nIt also provides over $24 billion to keep teachers, firefighters and law enforcement personnel on\nthe job while states continue to recover from the recession; over $13 billion for Vietnam\nveterans and survivors exposed to Agent Orange; $5.7 billion for PELL; $2.8 billion for Haiti;\n$677 million, fully offset, for border security; $275 million for the Gulf Coast oil spill; and $725\nmillion, fully offset, for other needs.\n \n \n \nWAR\n \nThe bill fully funds the Administration’s war supplemental request of $37.476 billion, of which\n$33 billion is for Defense and Military Construction and $4.46 billion is for State and Foreign\nAssistance.  This is in addition to the $130 billion provided in the FY 2010 appropriations bills.\n \nDepartment of Defense and Intelligence Activities in Iraq and Afghanistan:\n \n 1 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\nOngoing Military Operations\n \n \n - $20.4 billion for operations and maintenance, including the costs of the additional 30,000\ntroops ordered to Afghanistan; $3.4 billion, $500 million above the request for increased fuel\ncosts; and $1.6 billion, $614 million above the request, for the Working Capital Funds to reset\nprepositioned equipment and meet other Defense logistics needs. \n \n - $2.5 billion for military personnel, $600 million above the request due to better than\nprojected recruiting and retention levels in the Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Marine Corps\nReserve and an unanticipated increase in mobilization of Air Force Guardsmen and Reservists.\n \n \n - $68.4 million for defense health programs, including $35 million above the request for\nimproved operating rooms and equipment. \n \nSupport for Coalition Partners\n \n \n - $1 billion to expand and improve capabilities of the Iraq Security Forces, and a new\nreporting requirement on the intended uses of these funds to ensure they are used for only the\nmost critical needs that Iraq cannot meet itself. \n \n - $2.6 billion to expand and improve capabilities of the Afghan Security Forces. \n \nEquipment and Force Structure\n \n 2 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\n \n - $5.2 billion for procurement, $792 million above the request to replace combat loss\nequipment ($420 million), for Marine Corps trucks ($176 million), and Guard and Reserve\nequipment ($200 million). \n \n - $400 million to confront the threat of improvised explosive devices. \n \n - $390 million for research and development, $113 million above the request, including\n$180 million to develop and test force protection improvements to the Stryker combat vehicle.\n \n \nMilitary Construction Projects\n \n \n - $529 million for military construction projects, including $16.5 million, fully offset, for the\nreplacement of the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood, Texas, the site of the\n2009 shooting. \n \nDepartment of State and USAID, International Affairs and Stabilization Activities:\n \nAssistance and Operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq\n \n \n - $1.58 billion, $224 million below the request, for Diplomatic and Consular Programs in\nAfghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. The bulk of the funding changes from the request are for Iraq\nwhere $887 million is provided for overseas protective operations, $305 million above the\nrequest, and no funding is included for construction of two permanent consulates ($527 million\nwas requested). \n \n 3 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\n - $7 million, not requested, for the USAID Office of the Inspector General in Pakistan and\nAfghanistan. \n \n - $1.4 billion, $411 million below the request, for Economic Support to Afghanistan and\nPakistan: $1.17 billion for Afghanistan, $408 million below the request, due to likely slower\nspending than anticipated in the request; and $241 million for Pakistan, $3 million below the\nrequest.  Not less than $25 million must go toward human rights programs in Pakistan, including\ntraining of security forces in human rights and due process. \n \nOther International Assistance\n \n \n - $200 million, not requested, for Mexico Merida counter-narcotics assistance, of which not\nless than $100 million is for judicial, anti-corruption and rule of law activities. \n \n - $100 million, not requested, for Economic Support: $90 million for Jordan and $10 million\nfor El Salvador. \n \n - $60 million, not requested, for Foreign Military Financing assistance for Jordan. \n \nOther Provisions:\n \n - Afghanistan & Pakistan Performance Assessments: The bill includes language,\ncontained originally in the 2009 Supplemental Appropriations Bill requiring two reports: one on\nAfghanistan and Pakistan commitment and capabilities, including a new assessment of any\nactions that could undermine the success of the mission (due with the 2012 budget request)\nand the other on progress in Afghanistan and Pakistan.\n \n \n - No Permanent Bases: The bill prohibits funds to establish a permanent base in\nAfghanistan or Iraq. \n \n 4 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\n - Human Rights: The bill prohibits funds to support any training program if the Secretary of\nDefense has received credible information that the unit to be trained has committed a gross\nviolation of human rights, unless all necessary corrective steps have been taken. The bill\nprohibits funds for activities contravening laws or regulations to implement the UN Convention\nAgainst Torture or Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.\n \n \n - Afghanistan Cooperation: The bill provides only $50 million in direct budget support to\nthe government of Afghanistan until the Secretary of State certifies that the government is fully\ncooperating with the United States. \n \n - Guantanamo Bay: The bill continues the prohibition on the Administration transferring\nGuantanamo detainees to the United States, other than for the purposes of prosecution and\nonly after a security threat assessment has been provided to the Congress and the Governor of\nthe receiving state. \n \nJOBS\n \nThe bill provides $24.679 billion for education jobs, police jobs and firefighter jobs, and $5.667\nbillion to meet the current shortfall in the Pell Grant Program:\n \n - $23 billion for an Education Jobs Fund to provide additional emergency support to local\nschool districts to prevent impending layoffs.  Without this funding, it is estimated that as many\nas 300,000 elementary and secondary teachers will be laid off in the coming year. \n \n - $1.179 billion to retain or hire an estimated 5,525 law enforcement officers for three years.\n \n \n - $500 million to staff local fire companies and retain local firefighters. \n \n - $5.667 billion to meet the current year shortfall in the Pell Grant Program that was\nunanticipated last year.  Over 8 million students received Pell grants this year. \n \n 5 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\n \n \nVETERANS, HAITI, OIL SPILL, BORDER AND OTHER MATTERS\n \nVeterans: $13.377 billion in mandatory appropriations for the payment of benefits to Vietnam\nveterans and survivors for exposure to Agent Orange, which has been linked with Parkinson’s\ndisease, ischemic heart disease, and hairy cell/B cell leukemia. An estimated 86,069 people will\nbe eligible to receive retroactive payments and 67,259 people will be eligible to receive new\nbenefits. \n \nHaiti: $2.8 billion, $690,000 below the request, for Haiti, including:\n \n - $150 million in Food for Peace Grants. \n \n - $655 million for reimbursement to the Department of Defense, $60 million for\nreimbursement to the Department of Homeland Security and $220 million for reimbursement to\nthe Department of Health for health and social services response activities. \n \n - $1.7 billion to the Department of State, including: \n \n 1. $749 million for Economic Support for recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction for Haiti.\n \n 2. $212 million for Haiti debt relief. \n 3. $143.5 million for narcotics control and law enforcement programs. \n 4. $65 million for Diplomatic and Consular Programs. \n 5. $84.5 million for housing existing diplomatic and development personnel. \n 6. $96.5 million for the US contribution to the UN Peacekeeping Mission. \n 7. $5 million for international broadcasting operations. \n 8. $1.5 million for the USAID Office of the Inspector General. \n 9. $7.1 million for technical assistance to be provided by the Department of Treasury. \n 10. $351 million to reimburse International Disaster Assistance. \n \n 6 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\nGulf Oil Spill :  $224 million for the Gulf Coast oil spill. This includes: $83 million for\nunemployment assistance related to the oil spill and an oil spill relief employment program;\nallowance for the Coast Guard to receive advances from the Oil Spill Liability Trust fund; $7\nmillion for NOAA oil spill response activities, including scientific investigations and sampling;\n$14 million to respond to economic impacts on fishermen; $10 million for Justice legal activities;\n$5 million for economic recovery planning; and $31 million for the Department of the Interior to\nconduct additional inspections and enforcement and to strengthen oversight and regulation and\nfor the EPA to conduct a long-term risk study.\n \nNOTE: All costs directly related to the Gulf Coast oil spill must be reimbursed by the\nresponsible parties.\n \nBorder Security: $677 million, fully offset, to strengthen enforcement on the southern border,\nincluding:\n \n - $208.4 million for 1,200 additional Border Patrol agents deployed between the ports of\nentry along the Southwest Border. \n \n - $136 million to maintain current Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer staffing\nlevels and add 500 additional officers at ports of entry along the Southwest Border. \n \n - $67.5 million for improved tactical communications on the Southwest Border, three\npermanent Border Patrol forward operating bases, and a surge of workforce integrity\ninvestigations designed to prevent corruption among the CBP officers and agents. \n \n - $50 million for Operation Stonegarden grants to support local law enforcement activities\non the border. \n \n - $30 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement activities directed at reducing the\nthreat of narcotics smuggling and associated violence. \n \n - $177 million may be used to deploy National Guard troops to the southern border should\nthe President decide to do so. \n \n 7 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\nOther Security and Urgent Needs:\n \n The following additional items are all fully offset:\n \n \n USDA Rural Loans : $172.8 million for the USDA Section 502 guaranteed single family loan\nprogram, supporting $12 billion in loans.  This program ran out of money the second week of\nMay due to extraordinarily high demand because of the tight credit market.\n \nEnergy Loans: $180 million to allow $18 billion in innovative technology energy loans, split\nevenly between nuclear and renewable energy programs.\n \n \nEmergency Food Assistance: $50 million for The Emergency Food Assistance Program for\nfood purchases to distribute through local emergency food providers.\n \nFinancial Crisis Inquiry Commission: $2.7 million to allow the Commission to investigate the\ncauses of the recent financial crisis.  The Commission is tasked with submitting its report by\nDecember, 2011.\n \nCoast Guard: $58.5 million for the rehabilitation of Coast Guard aircraft.\n \nMine Safety: $48 million to reverse the growing backlog of mine safety enforcement cases\nwhile ensuring that the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) can complete 100% of\nits mandated mine inspections.  The funds will also allow improved MSHA emergency response\noperations through the purchase and upgrade of emergency response equipment; and testing\n 8 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\nand research by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) on the most\ncommon refuge chambers currently required in all underground mines and on other refuge\nalternatives.\n \nCapitol Police: $15.9 million, as requested, for the ongoing acquisition and installation of a\nmodern digital radio system because of known security threats. \n \nPort of Guam: $50 million, as requested, to improve, and provide greater access to, port\nfacilities.\n \nRecovery Act Audits: $20 million for the Government Accountability Office (GAO), to continue\nto audit and review the use of Recovery Act funding to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.\n \nFarm Loans: $27 million to support an increase in loan authority of almost $850,000,000 for the\nFarm Service Agency (FSA) to provide direct loans to family farmers who may not qualify for\nagricultural credit through other commercial institutions in the tight credit market.  The funding\nprovided in the FY 2010 appropriation bill was estimated to meet demand at the time the bill\nwas passed, but demand for the farm ownership and operating loan programs continues to rise\nabove historical levels due to the lack of availability of conventional credit. The increase is fully\noffset by rescissions of Farm Service Agency appropriations from 2004 through 2007 that are\nno longer needed.\n \nDisaster Assistance: $100 million in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding to\nhelp local communities devastated by natural disasters this year.\n \nOffsets:\n \nThe following rescissions of funds, from programs that no longer require such funds for the\npurposes originally appropriated, offset the items above:\n \n - $69.9 million in funds appropriated in 2007 and before to the Department of Agriculture. \n 9 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\n - $2.7 million in funds appropriated in 2010 to the Judiciary. \n - $36 million in funds appropriated in 2006 to FEMA. \n - $7 million in funds appropriated in 2006 to the Coast Guard. \n - $3.8 million in funds appropriated in 2007 for research in DHS’ Domestic Nuclear\nDetection office. \n - $6.6 million in funds appropriated in 2007 to the Transportation Security Administration. \n - $6 million in funds appropriated in 1995 to HHS. \n - $11 million in funds appropriated in 1989 to the Federal Highway Administration. \n - $8 million in funds appropriated in 2004 and 2006 to the Federal Aviation Administration. \n - $311 million in funds appropriated in 2008 for Ike, Gustav and Midwest Floods. \n - $318 million in funds appropriated in 2008 for CDBG for Katrina. \n - $15 million in funds appropriated in 2009 for NIST internal construction. \n - $47 million in funds appropriated for Army Corps of Engineers projects now terminated or\ncompleted. \n - $190 million in funds appropriated to the Department of Defense that are the result of bid\nsavings. \n \nOther Provisions: \n \n Iran Sanctions: The bill prohibits funding from being provided for any new contract unless the\ncontractor has certified that it, and any entities it controls, does not engage in activity that could\nbe sanctioned under section 5 of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996.\n \n No Fly List: The bill requires the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to require\ncommercial foreign air carriers to check the list of individuals TSA has prohibited from flying no\nlater than 30 minutes after the list has been updated.\n \n High-Value Detainee Interrogations: The bill requires the FBI to submit the High-Value\nDetainee Interrogation procedures, and any updates to those procedures, to the Congress\nwithin 30 days.\n \nDefense Jobs Estimates: The bill requires an assessment of the number of jobs and costs\nassociated with new major defense acquisitions planned for 2011.\n \n 10 / 11 FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill\n \n \n# # #\n 11 / 11" }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "5JWNPTKTIAPTHTEGVKW7WVNBDBKQMRJO.pdf", "text": " " }

[ -0.03511182218790054, -0.016980720683932304, 0.023404560983181, 0.02854952961206436, 0.060705650597810745, 0.13294768333435059, -0.02508869394659996, 0.04706111550331116, -0.0742456391453743, 0.01738891378045082, 0.04747714847326279, 0.020870128646492958, -0.06430170685052872, 0.037520863115787506, 0.0017708232626318932, 0.018334805965423584, 0.05773336440324783, 0.04413984343409538, -0.0013436481822282076, -0.008330806158483028, 0.0064436569809913635, 0.007909323088824749, 0.02884741872549057, 0.013697066344320774, -0.08523816615343094, 0.06415858864784241, 0.03337536379694939, -0.11420456320047379, 0.049660347402095795, 0.04605526849627495, -0.0004714953829534352, -0.07211415469646454, -0.025556037202477455, -0.030438221991062164, -0.017538808286190033, -0.01969798281788826, 0.05723794922232628, 0.012007375247776508, -0.06346599012613297, -0.009049961343407631, -0.0152397770434618, -0.06091969832777977, -0.04156040400266647, -0.017466453835368156, 0.00827361922711134, -0.0185202918946743, 0.014901191927492619, -0.005607882514595985, -0.052903465926647186, 0.02841467410326004, 0.01701858825981617, -0.13053974509239197, 0.023516656830906868, 0.011798103339970112, 0.007382508832961321, -0.09464038163423538, -0.06079384312033653, -0.05484076589345932, 0.03283233195543289, 0.010809950530529022, -0.0625995621085167, -0.036495719105005264, -0.004253774415701628, -0.057811759412288666, -0.05554690584540367, 0.03445357084274292, 0.0661715567111969, 0.047386594116687775, 0.11556579917669296, -0.02911265194416046, 0.004947291687130928, 0.040896229445934296, 0.10856235027313232, 0.11901471018791199, 0.0030104767065495253, 0.07154190540313721, 0.030148226767778397, 0.02751917392015457, 0.10576120018959045, -0.0590338297188282, -0.047884974628686905, 0.0533004030585289, 0.0005796657060272992, -0.026422204449772835, 0.022714318707585335, 0.024776844307780266, -0.002075447700917721, 0.07122624665498734, -0.0657995194196701, -0.035158827900886536, 0.010611733421683311, 0.048139747232198715, 0.02185250259935856, 0.00703484145924449, -0.012804343365132809, -0.03524439409375191, -0.05146312341094017, -0.08626332879066467, -0.011436641216278076, -0.032131072133779526, 0.05106756463646889, -0.028695426881313324, -0.028472457081079483, 0.033317871391773224, 0.0263386107981205, -0.05235854163765907, -0.06934221088886261, -0.11092360317707062, -0.028901124373078346, 0.05871286243200302, -0.03217324614524841, 0.03431626409292221, 0.06509644538164139, -0.029552308842539787, -0.02543223649263382, 0.009849876165390015, 0.01641399785876274, -0.022123025730252266, 0.11016830056905746, 0.03653969615697861, 0.014777466654777527, 0.05261713266372681, 0.035637665539979935, -0.010655422694981098, 0.06078483536839485, -0.024034913629293442, -0.035696759819984436, 4.5478197680444536e-33, -0.003690293524414301, 0.020076541230082512, 0.06479145586490631, 0.014427636750042439, 0.01342316810041666, 0.009260154329240322, 0.08740591257810593, -0.05173371732234955, 0.03704018145799637, -0.04848932474851608, 0.003047608071938157, -0.03713594377040863, 0.0343245267868042, -0.016781792044639587, -0.06989506632089615, -0.06704838573932648, -0.057238057255744934, -0.02316272258758545, -0.03920925036072731, 0.1003568172454834, -0.022797048091888428, -0.15106958150863647, -0.003454143414273858, 0.08544262498617172, -0.00035229380591772497, 0.07455845177173615, -0.011409916914999485, 0.04461152106523514, 0.06665834039449692, 0.026458587497472763, -0.031879860907793045, 0.06458421051502228, -0.0032402758952230215, -0.09983360767364502, 0.009621575474739075, -0.04314541444182396, 0.08568275719881058, -0.016542278230190277, -0.0677851065993309, -0.07648628950119019, -0.06553100049495697, -0.013270711526274681, -0.016842685639858246, -0.026810120791196823, 0.0865386575460434, -0.00962857436388731, -0.020240014418959618, -0.05031340569257736, 0.10500971227884293, -0.14238598942756653, 0.02730412222445011, 0.0028709969483315945, -0.10120038688182831, -0.08593474328517914, -0.0032736575230956078, 0.05699300765991211, -0.061333879828453064, -0.023447392508387566, -0.015621929429471493, -0.08893414586782455, 0.08535508066415787, -0.041436679661273956, -0.013964608311653137, -0.02717699483036995, -0.1270066797733307, -0.05999432131648064, -0.00028416592977009714, -0.015884002670645714, -0.01899491809308529, -0.040589217096567154, 0.03145001083612442, 0.030151069164276123, -0.026589974761009216, -0.072260282933712, -0.02598472312092781, 0.08954926580190659, 0.10634642094373703, -0.008904308080673218, 0.02023710310459137, 0.010487626306712627, 0.014455949887633324, 0.058529432862997055, 0.12395188957452774, 0.030002735555171967, 0.00785295944660902, -0.08074795454740524, -0.005898472853004932, 0.06319546699523926, -0.08870651572942734, -0.06649893522262573, 0.017038632184267044, 0.025715956464409828, 0.0028691627085208893, 0.038484856486320496, -0.040435608476400375, -6.152546248411484e-33, 0.00031474698334932327, 0.02292945422232151, 0.04284583777189255, -0.014183403924107552, 0.03389257192611694, -0.08869980275630951, 0.0087632080540061, 0.012671153992414474, 0.12730750441551208, 0.004386053886264563, -0.008412794210016727, 0.006541642360389233, 0.021172871813178062, -0.02747328206896782, -0.0510282963514328, 0.007061430718749762, -0.0232431311160326, 0.0966094434261322, -0.006179538555443287, -0.008779577910900116, 0.02388577349483967, 0.056115567684173584, -0.07186324149370193, -0.03883139044046402, 0.01721341721713543, 0.0070631070993840694, 0.01704752817749977, 0.04972619190812111, 0.028812386095523834, -0.024970361962914467, -0.02840619534254074, 0.07132217288017273, 0.006108334753662348, -0.0027774092741310596, -0.019909929484128952, -0.013226926326751709, 0.0022450534161180258, -0.06011919304728508, -0.03198568895459175, -0.047398630529642105, 0.10080374032258987, -0.020297525450587273, -0.016938738524913788, 0.027256255969405174, -0.039865944534540176, 0.006427237298339605, 0.06526792049407959, 0.034579019993543625, 0.017821157351136208, 0.07553889602422714, -0.022670064121484756, -0.06500855088233948, -0.04137830808758736, 0.018137700855731964, 0.004191728308796883, 0.052476223558187485, 0.034537605941295624, -0.03818424418568611, -0.02513926848769188, 0.05466192215681076, -0.02042502909898758, 0.045388732105493546, -0.0973295122385025, -0.05370629206299782, -0.009535507299005985, -0.05988842248916626, -0.003281285520642996, 0.06137068197131157, 0.07616189867258072, -0.07290567457675934, 0.04980039969086647, 0.02758190780878067, -0.06668299436569214, -0.1266903579235077, -0.05980321764945984, -0.028770284727215767, 0.004171858541667461, 0.034725990146398544, -0.06360147893428802, 0.029906921088695526, -0.004993451293557882, -0.02881263941526413, -0.0237006563693285, 0.1057838648557663, -0.004836300387978554, 0.040995512157678604, 0.034210383892059326, -0.025217218324542046, -0.05440415069460869, 0.025244232267141342, -0.08233505487442017, 0.015369119122624397, -0.06805258244276047, 0.102882519364357, -0.01082322746515274, -5.155036575388294e-8, 0.17227859795093536, 0.001341350143775344, -0.025442494079470634, -0.03437981382012367, 0.024277107790112495, -0.07997062802314758, -0.08273936808109283, 0.019713152199983597, -0.02110200561583042, 0.05777154490351677, 0.023315586149692535, 0.043696630746126175, -0.03237761929631233, -0.04984484240412712, -0.009802843444049358, -0.01343291811645031, -0.04533347859978676, -0.00480858888477087, -0.01714528724551201, -0.06412628293037415, -0.04815606400370598, 0.013288483954966068, 0.026073813438415527, -0.0011550781782716513, -0.035086143761873245, -0.03854777291417122, -0.03520641475915909, 0.08583522588014603, -0.02659475989639759, -0.04050242900848389, 0.024581456556916237, 0.023960860446095467, 0.020574769005179405, -0.04360702633857727, -0.018446190282702446, -0.031205490231513977, -0.03226383775472641, 0.002738308859989047, 0.036349765956401825, 0.01212356798350811, 0.01838737726211548, 0.02382383495569229, 0.08935555815696716, 0.04122425243258476, -0.05331531912088394, -0.001696521183475852, -0.09692566096782684, -0.03729170188307762, -0.00663383724167943, -0.028959784656763077, -0.05673448368906975, -0.015617363154888153, 0.027366800233721733, 0.03679393604397774, 0.04385272040963173, 0.11665938049554825, 0.0016390036325901747, -0.031197337433695793, 0.036387354135513306, 0.005233794916421175, 0.06761598587036133, -0.012316959910094738, 0.026404228061437607, 0.0904008224606514 ]

{ "pdf_file": "O5D34KMZVR5GAJPGEGG4LGZ547SRHJJC.pdf", "text": "2009 Early Intervention-Related Health Observances \n \nSponsoring organizations listed with each of the following observances have educational \nmaterials available to parents and other inte rested parties. For materials or additional \ninformation, contact the spons oring organization directly. \n \nJanuary \nGlaucoma Awareness Month www.preventblindness.org \n \nMarch of Dimes Birth Defects Pr evention Month www.marchofdimes.com \nFebruary \nCongenital Heart Defect Awareness Week (Feb. 7-14) www.tchin.org /aware \n \nKids E.N.T. Health Month www.entnet .org \nMarch \nChild Life Month www.childlife.org \n Save Your Vision Month www.aoa.org \nApril \nAutism Awareness Month www.autism-society.org \n Child Abuse Prevention Month www.preventchildabuse.org \n Infant Immunization Week (April 25-May 2) www.cdc.gov/vaccines \n March for Babies (April 25-26) www.marchforbabies.org \nMay \nAlcohol and Other Drug-Related Birth Defects Week www.ncad .org \n(May 10-16) \n Better Hearing and Speech Month www.entnet.org \n Healthy Vision Month www.eyecareamerica.org \nJune \nDeaf-Blind Awareness Week (June 21-27) www.hknc.org \n Vision Research Month www.preventblindness.org August \nCataract Awareness Month www.aao.org /eyemed \n \nChildren’s Eye Health and Safety Month www.preventblindness.org \n Spinal Muscular Atrophy Awareness Mont h www.curesma.com \nSeptember \nCraniofacial Acceptance Month www.ccakids.com \nOctober \nHearing Aid Awareness Week (Oct. 18-24) www.ihsinfo.org \n " }

[ 0.043543457984924316, -0.04529242962598801, 0.12509466707706451, 0.05509062483906746, -0.104668028652668, 0.04982447996735573, 0.001797095756046474, 0.07855930924415588, -0.1401279866695404, 0.008485009893774986, 0.019192060455679893, -0.0016481331549584866, -0.020900053903460503, -0.00928146205842495, -0.0874904915690422, 0.04730067029595375, 0.12485573440790176, -0.018392562866210938, 0.0020332825370132923, 0.05318823829293251, 0.11463718116283417, -0.11973777413368225, 0.012668224051594734, -0.06458335369825363, -0.0428643599152565, 0.01523402240127325, -0.013494275510311127, 0.05854790657758713, 0.00471156183630228, -0.049810852855443954, -0.058813709765672684, -0.016514314338564873, 0.028601158410310745, -0.08277340978384018, 0.02559785544872284, -0.04905189201235771, 0.024409616366028786, 0.039613258093595505, -0.006475352216511965, -0.05035858228802681, 0.07401426881551743, -0.016291430220007896, -0.03046467714011669, 0.06349138170480728, 0.030683506280183792, -0.035635337233543396, 0.039067551493644714, -0.00693122623488307, 0.017829839140176773, 0.0986487865447998, 0.05421602353453636, 0.07773010432720184, 0.11084277182817459, 0.07737976312637329, -0.05584549903869629, -0.01868538372218609, -0.03233139216899872, 0.05675472691655159, -0.05700044333934784, 0.028260549530386925, -0.024951502680778503, 0.00950417760759592, -0.07314763963222504, -0.035285916179418564, -0.05774061754345894, -0.009151032194495201, -0.055604513734579086, -0.02447657659649849, -0.02949748933315277, -0.03011951968073845, -0.003220502519980073, 0.003802043851464987, -0.0573577918112278, 0.04021017253398895, 0.04118313640356064, 0.06929467618465424, 0.07859534025192261, 0.008978958241641521, 0.030407221987843513, -0.02053915336728096, 0.0007274734089151025, -0.005548052489757538, 0.01193916704505682, -0.010792339220643044, 0.008649757131934166, 0.0009859445272013545, 0.031129933893680573, 0.00047515094047412276, 0.051414359360933304, -0.030553016811609268, 0.07124242186546326, 0.05851517990231514, -0.044327251613140106, -0.01581861451268196, 0.019463105127215385, 0.06238256022334099, -0.11563583463430405, -0.012637169100344181, -0.013343112543225288, -0.021983277052640915, -0.013329073786735535, 0.03860584646463394, 0.047282833606004715, -0.05322795733809471, -0.06913331151008606, 0.04331085458397865, 0.0425739549100399, 0.0667073205113411, -0.07373303920030594, 0.016438450664281845, 0.033755723387002945, -0.012018253095448017, -0.011511722579598427, 0.03684552386403084, 0.0013292955700308084, -0.003162751207128167, -0.0365230068564415, -0.032864950597286224, 0.11629600077867508, -0.023357827216386795, -0.03906753286719322, 0.01781202107667923, -0.027767067775130272, 0.1058933287858963, 0.027089398354291916, -0.005567019805312157, 0.010345890186727047, 8.372113946950158e-33, -0.08570375293493271, -0.011995704844594002, 0.011046639643609524, -0.06683626770973206, -0.055225443094968796, 0.027882548049092293, 0.00224210973829031, -0.032404281198978424, -0.029118098318576813, 0.022228771820664406, -0.10499212890863419, 0.09987776726484299, 0.05752474442124367, 0.02819812297821045, 0.03685935214161873, -0.028128424659371376, 0.05065896734595299, 0.06594260036945343, 0.023914946243166924, -0.02552739344537258, 0.04245034232735634, -0.052219267934560776, -0.06664355099201202, -0.04305730760097504, 0.01626492291688919, 0.0940547063946724, -0.02820311300456524, 0.07420457154512405, 0.051011018455028534, -0.005071548745036125, -0.01815631240606308, 0.04881610721349716, 0.036201104521751404, 0.06388247758150101, 0.02110108733177185, 0.017580287531018257, -0.020656516775488853, 0.06020110473036766, -0.09695029258728027, -0.03919106349349022, -0.015145303681492805, -0.051600560545921326, -0.03136173635721207, 0.012246341444551945, 0.014629085548222065, -0.05287155508995056, 0.0383400022983551, 0.014074407517910004, -0.0016472473507747054, -0.02262166328728199, -0.05067957192659378, 0.06417835503816605, -0.09180022776126862, 0.060780078172683716, -0.07208143919706345, 0.04386024549603462, -0.04145259037613869, 0.041657980531454086, 0.041816212236881256, -0.07955031096935272, -0.0538407638669014, 0.0026624815072864294, 0.037428297102451324, -0.03771025687456131, 0.03939465433359146, -0.020796531811356544, -0.04867779463529587, 0.004679321777075529, 0.02681475318968296, 0.07641761004924774, 0.031039012596011162, -0.005982987582683563, 0.02650086209177971, 0.0699094906449318, 0.07480921596288681, -0.04830297455191612, -0.0761909931898117, 0.0033874588552862406, 0.021832484751939774, 0.062345925718545914, -0.08281980454921722, -0.07152308523654938, -0.0944950208067894, -0.005212676711380482, 0.13539104163646698, 0.004398341290652752, 0.00492817210033536, 0.02640567347407341, -0.028697174042463303, -0.05222790315747261, 0.0597035214304924, 0.043002281337976456, -0.052468061447143555, 0.09713457524776459, -0.005018705502152443, -9.772009434660451e-33, 0.027224138379096985, 0.04545881971716881, 0.06532654911279678, -0.015674157068133354, -0.01655866578221321, -0.0180578101426363, 0.034847430884838104, 0.046485476195812225, 0.0447513647377491, 0.01834751106798649, -0.04909541457891464, -0.07774553447961807, -0.04888175427913666, -0.027413951233029366, -0.017040837556123734, 0.011441195383667946, 0.04192541167140007, 0.027764474973082542, -0.00010306942567694932, -0.022038893774151802, -0.04787394031882286, 0.07097743451595306, -0.043716102838516235, 0.09829118847846985, 0.04162220284342766, -0.033078812062740326, 0.014395013451576233, -0.0033685010857880116, -0.0644061341881752, -0.017504651099443436, -0.06878281384706497, -0.06487979739904404, 0.0054456982761621475, 0.06509925425052643, -0.0021045005414634943, 0.036454200744628906, 0.03590717911720276, 0.027640892192721367, 0.06971608847379684, 0.06188410148024559, 0.061044830828905106, -0.05617106333374977, 0.0116522666066885, 0.030003968626260757, 0.1052754819393158, 0.03382718563079834, -0.06322440505027771, -0.046115580946207047, -0.06280414760112762, -0.0022817233111709356, -0.0008648622315376997, -0.011074015870690346, -0.002178224502131343, 0.013428999111056328, 0.054972004145383835, 0.014011209830641747, 0.0752447172999382, -0.06428114324808121, -0.09161432087421417, 0.004599182400852442, 0.09637996554374695, -0.03942142054438591, -0.042596638202667236, 0.07822225242853165, 0.002714719157665968, -0.11516765505075455, -0.036949798464775085, -0.08850953727960587, -0.09845217317342758, 0.010461953468620777, -0.10613187402486801, -0.08514072000980377, -0.028769023716449738, 0.01466028206050396, -0.03182753175497055, 0.013808146119117737, 0.04198376461863518, 0.03703222796320915, 0.014707986265420914, -0.02491888962686062, 0.0278372373431921, -0.057620733976364136, 0.026378560811281204, -0.0008631811942905188, -0.04007287696003914, -0.03151516243815422, -0.025080431252717972, -0.05251917988061905, 0.021879391744732857, 0.10435114055871964, -0.07059419900178909, -0.009229815565049648, -0.04037066921591759, 0.05423136055469513, -0.06445851176977158, -5.295709115671343e-8, 0.1292468011379242, 0.004028281196951866, -0.02239684946835041, 0.01364039070904255, 0.01254709530621767, 0.0341026708483696, -0.07949210703372955, 0.025657767429947853, -0.057214684784412384, 0.029323233291506767, 0.03228791803121567, 0.030919592827558517, -0.052679888904094696, 0.05721107870340347, 0.010070660151541233, -0.03600224852561951, 0.05365221947431564, -0.06813924014568329, -0.015560466796159744, -0.02911168709397316, -0.08384034782648087, -0.03815359249711037, -0.07207171618938446, 0.08111919462680817, 0.034390468150377274, -0.022580936551094055, -0.05029507353901863, -0.005933128762990236, -0.030852466821670532, -0.011753314174711704, -0.021390553563833237, 0.026911098510026932, 0.0003586620441637933, -0.031012091785669327, -0.021398622542619705, 0.07600484043359756, 0.013779264874756336, -0.018816789612174034, 0.023089606314897537, -0.027296677231788635, 0.02011854387819767, -0.012017828412353992, 0.045661501586437225, -0.04797648638486862, 0.12780627608299255, -0.02269016206264496, -0.015562057495117188, -0.1090642437338829, 0.05598487704992294, -0.07674708962440491, -0.019404403865337372, -0.03444572165608406, -0.035283032804727554, -0.03638853877782822, -0.005592476110905409, -0.05618544667959213, -0.09889651834964752, 0.00748279457911849, 0.024165524169802666, -0.05580297112464905, -0.019826184958219528, 0.04508271440863609, -0.06182416155934334, -0.060651056468486786 ]

{ "pdf_file": "KDLB3IO7SCHXPEJZJYXLBWTX2MTEUOS6.pdf", "text": "Greater Peoria Mass Transit District (CityLink)ID Number: 5056\nwww.ridecitylink.org\n2105 Northeast Jefferson Street\nPeoria, IL 61603-3587General Manager: Mr. Thomas Lucek\n(309) 679-8158\nGeneral Information\nUrbanized Area (UZA) Statistics - 2000 Census\nPeoria, IL\n Square Miles\n Population\n Population Ranking out of 465 UZAs\nOther UZAs Served\nService Area Statistics\n Square Miles\n Population123\n247,172\n129\n105\n207,795Service Consumption\n Annual Passenger Miles\n Annual Unlinked Trips\n Average Weekday Unlinked Trips\n Average Saturday Unlinked Trips\n Average Sunday Unlinked Trips\nService Supplied\n Annual Vehicle Revenue Miles\n Annual Vehicle Revenue Hours\n Vehicles Operated in Maximum Service\n Vehicles Available for Maximum Service\n Base Period Requirement15,222,096\n2,858,795\n9,691\n6,924\n0\n2,526,088\n160,397\n71\n108\n25Financial Information\nFare Revenues Earned\nSources of Operating Funds Expended\n Fare Revenues (10%)\n Local Funds (7%)\n State Funds (62%)\n Federal Assistance (19%)\n Other Funds (1%)\nTotal Operating Funds Expended\nSources of Capital Funds Expended\n Local Funds (0%)\n State Funds (0%)\n Federal Assistance (0%)\n Other Funds (0%)\nTotal Capital Funds Expended$2,143,715\n$2,143,715\n$1,388,122\n$12,787,147\n$3,906,771\n$274,754\n$20,500,509\n$0\n$0\n$0\n$0\n$0Summary Operating Expenses\n Salary, Wages, Benefits\n Materials and Supplies\n Purchased Transportation\n Other Operating Expenses\nTotal Operating Expenses\nReconciling Cash Expenditures$13,336,764\n$2,875,036\n$1,865,427\n$2,423,282\n$20,500,509\n$0\nVehicles Operated in Maximum Service and Uses of Capital Funds\nModeDirectly\nOperatedPurchased\nTransportation1Revenue\nVehiclesSystems and\nGuidewaysFacilities and\nStations Other Total \nBus 47 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0\nDemand Response 0 24 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0\nTotal 47 24 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Sources of Operating Funds Expended Sources of Capital Funds Expended\n62%19%\n1%\n10%\n7%\n \n \nModal Characteristics\nModeOperating\nExpenses 1Fare\nRevenues 1Uses of\nCapital FundsAnnual\nPassenger\nMilesAnnual Vehicle\nRevenue MilesAnnual\nUnlinked\nTripsAnnual Vehicle\nRevenue HoursFixed\nGuideway\nDirectional\nRoute MilesVehicles\nAvailable for\nMaximum\nServiceAverage\nFleet Age\nin YearsVehicles\nOperated in\nMaximum\nServicePeak to\nBase\nRatioPercent\nSpares \nBus $17,919,805 $1,729,497 $0 14,090,997 1,862,027 2,736,116 106,235 N/A 81 12.2 47 1.88 72%\nDemand Response $2,580,704 $414,218 $0 1,131,099 664,061 122,679 54,162 N/A 27 2.3 24 N/A 12%\nPerformance Measures Service Efficiency Service Effectiveness Service Effectiveness\nModeOperating Expense per\nVehicle Revenue MileOperating Expense per\nVehicle Revenue HourOperating Expense per\nPassenger MileOperating Expense per\nUnlinked Passenger TripUnlinked Passenger Trips per\nVehicle Revenue MileUnlinked Passenger Trips per\nVehicle Revenue Hour \nBus $9.62 $168.68 $1.27 $6.55 1.47 25.76\nDemand Response $3.89 $47.65 $2.28 $21.04 0.18 2.27\nOperating Expense per\nVehicle Revenue MileOperating Expenses per\nPassenger MileUnlinked Passenger Trips per\nVehicle Revenue Mile\n010203040506070809100.002.505.007.5010.0012.50\n \n010203040506070809100.000.250.500.751.001.251.50\n \n010203040506070809100.000.250.500.751.001.251.501.75\n Bus Bus BusOperating Expense per\nVehicle Revenue MileOperating Expenses per\nPassenger MileUnlinked Passenger Trips per\nVehicle Revenue Mile\n010203040506070809100.001.002.003.004.005.00\n \n010203040506070809100.005.0010.0015.0020.0025.00\n \n010203040506070809100.000.100.200.300.40\n Demand\nResponseDemand\nResponseDemand\nResponse\n1 Excludes data for purchased transportation reported separately Data Source: 2010 National Transit Database 09/29/2011 1:09 PM" }

[ 0.06831298768520355, -0.012279456481337547, 0.005907822400331497, 0.0501130074262619, -0.02735837548971176, -0.04764827713370323, -0.09349147230386734, -0.015412773936986923, -0.11381002515554428, -0.020343584939837456, 0.016075043007731438, -0.04485967755317688, 0.023983100429177284, -0.07227493822574615, -0.053703416138887405, 0.014988122507929802, 0.036447614431381226, -0.0066129290498793125, 0.007662015501409769, 0.03456567972898483, -0.04443866014480591, 0.06755237281322479, -0.0024009482003748417, 0.03097059205174446, -0.0119090611115098, 0.06333622336387634, -0.09985131025314331, -0.029205068945884705, -0.003798202145844698, -0.09803865849971771, 0.01581987924873829, 0.06803715974092484, -0.02955719083547592, -0.025995660573244095, -0.050567153841257095, 0.003813893534243107, 0.029359500855207443, -0.08447100967168808, -0.011729154735803604, 0.01319462712854147, -0.01279767882078886, 0.0005445622955448925, 0.015325351618230343, -0.020493997260928154, -0.03427289426326752, 0.12508296966552734, -0.0074243019334971905, -0.01737068220973015, 0.136310875415802, -0.044285546988248825, -0.01973561942577362, -0.009010632522404194, 0.019645757973194122, 0.06430160999298096, -0.016521526500582695, -0.060772527009248734, -0.012070177122950554, -0.03914998099207878, 0.04559186473488808, -0.0051133581437170506, -0.011190593242645264, 0.04055628553032875, -0.013120749965310097, -0.017011336982250214, -0.003451216034591198, 0.0272319708019495, -0.13379241526126862, -0.09845293313264847, -0.02038535848259926, -0.023025235161185265, 0.04553813114762306, 0.0036450084298849106, -0.09083359688520432, -0.025634679943323135, -0.04009630158543587, -0.024805612862110138, 0.011754021048545837, 0.0810173824429512, -0.009906324557960033, -0.07584108412265778, -0.07460711896419525, -0.08316660672426224, 0.08193816244602203, -0.014913411810994148, 0.08066636323928833, -0.014580387622117996, 0.012495738454163074, 0.07180996239185333, 0.059068500995635986, -0.035479385405778885, 0.044138118624687195, 0.02195953205227852, 0.030718406662344933, -0.04219643771648407, 0.06075361743569374, 0.05217057839035988, -0.04113113880157471, -0.04502195864915848, -0.04379021003842354, 0.0241608377546072, -0.014752262271940708, -0.003490160685032606, -0.10370970517396927, 0.04124220833182335, -0.01368220429867506, 0.041538044810295105, 0.016881732270121574, 0.09403564780950546, -0.06716293841600418, 0.10644997656345367, 0.11304634809494019, 0.023652736097574234, 0.04952220246195793, -0.0449247881770134, 0.0005878351512365043, -0.01628493145108223, -0.15832555294036865, 0.06761455535888672, 0.042928408831357956, -0.017175082117319107, -0.06692184507846832, -0.0009298071963712573, 0.006253047380596399, 0.07457245886325836, 0.03083709627389908, -0.037802159786224365, -0.009324690327048302, 1.5588160791277275e-33, 0.0757494643330574, -0.0072275507263839245, -0.02820141613483429, -0.05027538165450096, -0.01490189041942358, 0.013831676915287971, -0.07430390268564224, 0.037206195294857025, 0.05389555171132088, 0.011768870986998081, -0.07061921060085297, -0.02923964522778988, 0.011773534119129181, 0.020805412903428078, 0.06154251843690872, -0.01934332773089409, 0.012555222027003765, -0.0050642527639865875, -0.04212905466556549, -0.017165083438158035, 0.013642381876707077, -0.09770984947681427, -0.07266022264957428, 0.0053817229345440865, 0.019554201513528824, 0.03873269632458687, -0.07327144593000412, -0.03408455848693848, -0.03715083748102188, 0.032597433775663376, -0.028176624327898026, -0.05706946551799774, 0.03764699399471283, 0.034916795790195465, -0.027216697111725807, 0.03465493395924568, -0.03558722138404846, 0.007120434194803238, -0.10376544296741486, 0.07956317067146301, 0.0764239951968193, -0.03674967586994171, -0.07433225959539413, 0.0030275683384388685, -0.10220083594322205, 0.08418338745832443, 0.1054217591881752, 0.05831679701805115, 0.002333245240151882, -0.006747486535459757, -0.08453916013240814, 0.07296028733253479, -0.05572491139173508, 0.0021595091093331575, 0.026963651180267334, 0.047260697931051254, 0.0561654306948185, -0.004097037483006716, -0.037947338074445724, 0.09889551252126694, -0.014813455753028393, 0.032084379345178604, 0.008248809725046158, -0.023887893185019493, -0.06708311289548874, -0.06443885713815689, -0.0502164401113987, 0.10787505656480789, -0.013811399228870869, -0.053132563829422, 0.02644467167556286, -0.054819460958242416, 0.014875339344143867, -0.03824097290635109, 0.0896768867969513, -0.032382622361183167, 0.03382210060954094, -0.05105297639966011, -0.007210359442979097, -0.0031498433090746403, -0.12460149079561234, -0.008168493397533894, -0.032464154064655304, -0.04810044541954994, 0.07986459136009216, -0.030719533562660217, 0.06058979406952858, -0.024888085201382637, -0.0567462183535099, -0.08860551565885544, -0.033935826271772385, -0.052276384085416794, 0.03272278234362602, -0.001347453915514052, -0.04808147996664047, -3.778963810660135e-33, -0.040826573967933655, 0.01210700161755085, 0.04717457666993141, -0.0052569350227713585, 0.0649820938706398, 0.002602501306682825, 0.061604224145412445, 0.031107613816857338, -0.03239664435386658, -0.0016367206117138267, -0.07624843716621399, -0.025711797177791595, 0.022104548290371895, -0.027000809088349342, 0.040512822568416595, -0.018237734213471413, 0.041113924235105515, 0.009709818288683891, -0.024223893880844116, 0.0017697940347716212, -0.05048898234963417, 0.042179007083177567, -0.04252966493368149, -0.04289836063981056, 0.020242959260940552, 0.03798338770866394, 0.038894034922122955, -0.014489474706351757, -0.004825044889003038, -0.046391382813453674, -0.10382173955440521, 0.003796952310949564, -0.03446156159043312, 0.026212433353066444, -0.052759166806936264, 0.04996870458126068, 0.004926543217152357, -0.01973756216466427, -0.0323198027908802, 0.019853578880429268, 0.03866623714566231, 0.035348810255527496, -0.008262021467089653, 0.03243860602378845, -0.0026076051872223616, -0.02796492911875248, 0.04166937246918678, 0.042266733944416046, 0.003634594613686204, 0.07460203766822815, 0.04325008764863014, 0.02355414442718029, -0.0053270794451236725, 0.1412402093410492, 0.016661712899804115, -0.019948825240135193, 0.024439558386802673, 0.05455690622329712, -0.03708077594637871, -0.061632733792066574, 0.03766687586903572, -0.010627597570419312, 0.03872360289096832, 0.09807263314723969, -0.012274535372853279, -0.0512816347181797, -0.00700253713876009, -0.04282720014452934, -0.057804424315690994, 0.0647827610373497, -0.038176167756319046, -0.08169116824865341, 0.07191989570856094, -0.005161204840987921, -0.024408048018813133, -0.01762748882174492, 0.033467069268226624, 0.049895260483026505, 0.02417292632162571, 0.006841105874627829, -0.12439428269863129, -0.029593324288725853, -0.016682162880897522, 0.06167537346482277, -0.031719040125608444, -0.008411821909248829, -0.03669852763414383, -0.10241498798131943, 0.02813250944018364, 0.06399423629045486, -0.048630911856889725, 0.04255376383662224, 0.0018716936465352774, 0.02761739306151867, -0.004309427458792925, -5.417986415068299e-8, 0.014204837381839752, 0.007897282019257545, -0.05558748543262482, 0.07119037210941315, 0.13184913992881775, 0.056410759687423706, 0.07031333446502686, 0.03625383600592613, -0.15258829295635223, -0.002513103885576129, 0.05612393841147423, 0.015611987560987473, -0.039865750819444656, -0.02943449281156063, 0.019346212968230247, -0.0013725688913837075, 0.04566477611660957, -0.036784153431653976, -0.009330259636044502, -0.04960073530673981, 0.0036544008180499077, 0.0092623895034194, 0.052191317081451416, -0.019516436383128166, -0.07954452931880951, 0.012081818655133247, 0.042712002992630005, -0.05078352615237236, 0.024993551895022392, -0.010658115148544312, -0.04274759441614151, 0.01691707968711853, 0.005906885024160147, -0.12272080779075623, -0.0006604930968023837, -0.0030156869906932116, -0.031367041170597076, 0.06919487565755844, 0.06641832739114761, 0.09134995937347412, -0.03631553798913956, 0.03779757022857666, -0.004414920695126057, 0.039725176990032196, 0.06028595194220543, 0.030553795397281647, -0.05601413920521736, 0.004189935978502035, 0.04710657522082329, -0.05279539152979851, 0.03862113878130913, -0.003893863642588258, -0.0025079597253352404, 0.07552570104598999, 0.0789259523153305, 0.12244535237550735, -0.051619186997413635, -0.11278471350669861, -0.011429552920162678, 0.06366792321205139, -0.005616765469312668, -0.028763584792613983, -0.013914121314883232, -0.048794034868478775 ]

{ "pdf_file": "AGA4FFOUY3VW5J6OAKHFGWZ6TS4KYOF7.pdf", "text": "Idaho Transportation Department\nMonthly Vehicle Speed Report\nFebruary 2004\nCounty: Butte Station # 050 \nDistrict: 06 Route: US-93\nAscending Direction: East Segment Code and Milepost: 002240 229.510\n150 Feet N.E. of Craters of the Moon National Monu Speed Limit: 65\nSpeeds Average Daily Volumes and Percentages\n85th over speed limit 5 mph over limit 10 mph over limit Day\nDirection Average Pctile Volume % Volume % Volume % Total\nAscending 61.8 70.8 143 43.5% 57 17.3% 15 4.6% 329\nDescending 59.3 70.8 130 38.8% 55 16.4% 14 4.2% 335\n60.5 70.8 273 41.1 112 16.9 29 4.4 664 Total % % %\nAverage Daily Volumes by Speed\nDirection 0>-30 30>-35 35>-40 40>-45 45>-50 50>-55 55>-60 60>-65 65>-70 70>-75 75>-80 80>-85 85>-140 Day Total\n329 Ascending 1 2 5 13 19 27 44 75 86 42 10 4 1\n335 Descending 1 3 12 20 28 38 46 57 75 41 11 2 1\n2 5 17 33 47 65 90 132 161 83 21 6 2 664 Total\nPercentage of Daily Volume by Speed\nDirection 0>-30 30>-35 35>-40 40>-45 45>-50 50>-55 55>-60 60>-65 65>-70 70>-75 75>-80 80>-85 85>-140 Day Total\nAscending 0.30% 0.61% 1.52% 3.95% 5.78% 8.21% 13.37% 22.80% 26.14% 12.77% 3.04% 1.22% 0.30% 100.0%\nDescending 0.30% 0.90% 3.58% 5.97% 8.36% 11.34% 13.73% 17.01% 22.39% 12.24% 3.28% 0.60% 0.30% 100.0%\nTotal 0.30% 0.75% 2.56% 4.97% 7.08% 9.79% 13.55% 19.88% 24.25% 12.50% 3.16% 0.90% 0.30% 100.0%\nPage 1 Creation Date: 10/1/2004 16:00" }

[ -0.10266679525375366, -0.00030808753217570484, 0.03513253107666969, 0.06423887610435486, 0.10682203620672226, -0.04217679426074028, -0.08319804817438126, 0.03344837203621864, 0.008899105712771416, 0.0716974288225174, 0.01863759383559227, -0.07531029731035233, 0.01359840389341116, -0.01060725562274456, 0.009071817621588707, -0.003494119271636009, -0.013574023731052876, 0.01618744432926178, -0.06799424439668655, -0.052028197795152664, -0.012782953679561615, 0.09397827088832855, 0.0004834785358980298, 0.02931034192442894, -0.01918049342930317, -0.0986570194363594, -0.1312112957239151, 0.03476063534617424, -0.09809591621160507, 0.07219476252794266, -0.0910697802901268, 0.06294455379247665, -0.01941690407693386, 0.01883205585181713, 0.03295852616429329, 0.037096165120601654, 0.056321825832128525, -0.021614208817481995, -0.004409245681017637, 0.02001883275806904, -0.04000416398048401, -0.11366519331932068, 0.05485441908240318, -0.05020081624388695, -0.05706831440329552, -0.016824878752231598, 0.01620602048933506, 0.010680504143238068, -0.10207449644804001, -0.059155501425266266, 0.041136234998703, 0.08156488090753555, -0.041086167097091675, -0.048785705119371414, -0.008874383755028248, -0.00975298136472702, 0.08063352108001709, 0.03241341561079025, -0.0112860556691885, 0.004153425805270672, -0.018490977585315704, -0.008011071011424065, -0.09562969207763672, -0.0013184151612222195, 0.06742347031831741, 0.015345633029937744, -0.05012941733002663, 0.003735726699233055, 0.0068174744956195354, -0.05758456140756607, -0.00155169446952641, 0.05838945880532265, -0.043616000562906265, -0.03644103184342384, 0.01917215809226036, -0.031061561778187752, 0.029293548315763474, 0.06724807620048523, 0.10298171639442444, -0.030262039974331856, 0.09398826956748962, -0.01575361378490925, 0.03592430427670479, -0.14555828273296356, -0.11620883643627167, 0.018041441217064857, 0.049165382981300354, 0.09333154559135437, 0.09597738087177277, 0.03439689800143242, 0.07173708081245422, -0.050451360642910004, 0.0368390716612339, 0.12531830370426178, -0.018691955134272575, 0.07124697417020798, 0.010378030128777027, -0.022804439067840576, -0.00821785070002079, -0.05286151170730591, 0.02742951549589634, 0.016073836013674736, -0.05238111689686775, -0.039228376001119614, 0.005686166230589151, -0.030227728188037872, -0.004365711472928524, -0.08261831104755402, 0.0003318788658361882, -0.04096374660730362, -0.004271398764103651, 0.03866225481033325, -0.06060606986284256, -0.014668365009129047, 0.00969457533210516, -0.0659036859869957, 0.02311473898589611, -0.008597934618592262, 0.03277323767542839, -0.03805875778198242, -0.013100745156407356, 0.06141050159931183, -0.020338814705610275, 0.039280761033296585, 0.07077548652887344, 0.01770130731165409, -0.030333014205098152, 6.896330013318717e-33, 0.026547931134700775, 0.0417076051235199, -0.02713659219443798, -0.016994541510939598, 0.04816547781229019, -0.040395982563495636, -0.08464905619621277, -0.07627272605895996, 0.004879788029938936, -0.049371812492609024, -0.03496327996253967, -0.003892528126016259, -0.06980536878108978, 0.08427625894546509, -0.015205356292426586, -0.005457583349198103, -0.05967513099312782, 0.0035250321961939335, 0.04671582952141762, 0.08730193972587585, -0.09172533452510834, 0.008667255751788616, -0.025636089965701103, 0.03913044184446335, -0.00038353848503902555, -0.01800825074315071, 0.039853040128946304, -0.005409515928477049, -0.026925314217805862, -0.007106187287718058, 0.031550388783216476, -0.020470192655920982, -0.06300866603851318, -0.016808880493044853, 0.025943024083971977, -0.025751158595085144, 0.01108686625957489, 0.03661483898758888, -0.03731512278318405, 0.05902330204844475, 0.010218868963420391, 0.10107539594173431, 0.04511360079050064, 0.026843449100852013, 0.08159280568361282, -0.00931451003998518, 0.09096495062112808, 0.05224804952740669, -0.05743462219834328, -0.015527046285569668, -0.04424615576863289, 0.05226125568151474, 0.04108146205544472, -0.1269066035747528, -0.010240639559924603, -0.010791033506393433, 0.06082345172762871, -0.05603208765387535, 0.011624090373516083, -0.028554493561387062, -0.042764127254486084, 0.006977368146181107, -0.012601406313478947, -0.05430781841278076, 0.04389895498752594, 0.058562397956848145, -0.014675699174404144, -0.020161038264632225, -0.027072252705693245, 0.07344852387905121, -0.010347572155296803, -0.04693049192428589, -0.00017586078320164233, -0.02568947523832321, 0.05931469798088074, 0.009120325557887554, 0.10709527879953384, 0.03471541032195091, -0.010471303015947342, -0.031145194545388222, -0.04133176803588867, -0.020713021978735924, 0.059919197112321854, -0.05957061052322388, -0.1388266682624817, -0.08108872920274734, -0.07796985656023026, 0.0340130478143692, 0.05537822097539902, 0.047622278332710266, 0.01989579200744629, -0.021738238632678986, 0.056250717490911484, 0.05148201808333397, 0.0019720951095223427, -6.940029750494505e-33, 0.0039917477406561375, 0.02322274260222912, 0.007385009899735451, 0.04164225235581398, -0.0363868810236454, -0.10860060900449753, -0.00750457588583231, -0.026598045602440834, 0.11812685430049896, -0.1055307686328888, 0.011858882382512093, 0.022767985239624977, 0.008097696118056774, 0.02263735979795456, -0.01290209498256445, -0.0361187681555748, 0.03268081322312355, 0.03451171889901161, -0.07528554648160934, -0.031106961891055107, -0.059925589710474014, 0.03249828517436981, -0.051492173224687576, 0.03939400240778923, -0.06687251478433609, 0.026438703760504723, -0.008042111061513424, -0.008316919207572937, -0.012548641301691532, -0.07404973357915878, -0.05838354304432869, -0.005149983335286379, -0.02500222809612751, 0.08625341206789017, -0.02566474862396717, 0.07074254006147385, 0.023744013160467148, -0.04371143504977226, 0.056535929441452026, 0.017469169571995735, 0.046673618257045746, 0.019209319725632668, -0.015427677892148495, -0.06594924628734589, 0.0003687564458232373, 0.04310992360115051, -0.001419237582013011, -0.0023432807065546513, 0.0013477582251653075, 0.06437309086322784, 0.06264545768499374, 0.053589340299367905, -0.09555179625749588, -0.009702186100184917, -0.0038861059583723545, -0.03985041752457619, 0.08465764671564102, -0.0693250447511673, -0.06491638720035553, 0.03583572804927826, -0.03320423141121864, 0.027322495356202126, 0.010143924504518509, -0.009208755567669868, 0.021884482353925705, -0.011729232035577297, -0.0682327076792717, -0.0443812720477581, 0.13183531165122986, 0.05548076331615448, 0.0381275899708271, -0.03921759873628616, -0.010977237485349178, -0.15292657911777496, -0.0018619353650137782, 0.0007473242003470659, -0.02654726430773735, -0.041919633746147156, -0.0004418854950927198, 0.07077830284833908, -0.038706373423337936, 0.058153677731752396, -0.019298024475574493, 0.0007935918984003365, 0.026932692155241966, 0.030887719243764877, -0.014350317418575287, -0.022272301837801933, 0.03664681687951088, 0.11565779149532318, -0.05859515070915222, -0.02379968762397766, -0.021247701719403267, 0.03086775541305542, -0.0008398435893468559, -6.88970089868235e-8, -0.018313871696591377, 0.008385367691516876, -0.01706870086491108, 0.09111366420984268, 0.03010137565433979, 0.02044771797955036, -0.0104487594217062, -0.0009365880978293717, 0.03125, 0.04120555520057678, 0.007663328666239977, 0.11710239946842194, 0.06594564020633698, 0.029127242043614388, 0.0005521377315744758, -0.08055301010608673, 0.03430844098329544, 0.008991820737719536, -0.03622027486562729, -0.05779079720377922, 0.02954518422484398, 0.0326867550611496, -0.0594344362616539, -0.0384361632168293, 0.07308289408683777, 0.0007500041974708438, -0.02017231285572052, 0.10623472929000854, 0.06910492479801178, 0.03026479482650757, 0.0030100448057055473, -0.05784442275762558, -0.06241786107420921, -0.05382487550377846, 0.0075436183251440525, -0.06545620411634445, -0.026810450479388237, 0.06307938694953918, 0.04009630158543587, 0.02941763587296009, 0.02000494860112667, 0.028296364471316338, -0.05765513330698013, 0.039588943123817444, -0.06279152631759644, -0.12093651294708252, -0.060787562280893326, 0.054038241505622864, -0.017448509112000465, 0.11504550278186798, 0.04501400887966156, -0.0518534854054451, -0.01965406909584999, 0.026143165305256844, 0.05980406329035759, -0.0393388494849205, -0.0006422680453397334, -0.002133704023435712, 0.014424403198063374, 0.012207471765577793, 0.009001142345368862, -0.05629176273941994, -0.056197840720415115, 0.005293259397149086 ]

{ "pdf_file": "P27OC5LB5CYK7PNMUUFAMXEQ3THDTNJ4.pdf", "text": "1 \n Summary of Major Points: Christopher B. Field, PhD1, Carnegie Institution for Science2\nEnergy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Energy and Power: “Climate \nScience and the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Regulations”, March 8, 2011 , \n The modern understanding of climate change is based on many lines of robust, \nindependent evidence, providing a foundation of well established conclusions, including the \nfollowing, from the US Global Change Research Program: ( 1) Global warming is unequivocal \nand primarily human- induced, (2) Climate changes are under way in the United States and are \nprojected to grow , and (3) Widespread climate -related impacts are occurring now and are \nexpected to increase. \n Against these foundations, I want to talk about the observed (not simulated) climate \nsensitivity of two importan t processes – US agriculture and wildfires in the Western US. \n• Observed yields of corn, soybean, and cotton all have clear temperature thresholds, below \nwhich yields are stable and above which yields fall quickly with rising temperatures. A \nsingle day of 104˚F instead of 84˚F reduces corn yields by about 7%. Modest warming over the century is expected to reduce yields by 30- 46% below levels that would \notherwise occur, and severe warming could reduce yields by 63 -82% \n• Large wildfires in the Western US are mor e frequent, last longer, and occur over a longer \nfire season in years that are unusually warm. Based on observed patterns, a 1.8 ˚F \nwarming would increase the annual area burned from 1.3 million acres (the average for 1970- 2003) to 4.5 million acres. \n \n \n1 Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author and \ndo not necessarily reflect those of the Carnegie Institution for Science or the IPCC \n2 The Carnegie Institution for Science is a not -for-profit organization dedicated to basic research for the benefit of \nhumanity. 2 \n \nStatement of \nChristopher B. Field, PhD3\n \nDirector, Department of Global Ecology \nCarnegie Institution for Science4\nCo-chair, Working Group II of the IPCC \n \nMailing Address: \nCarnegie Institution for Science \n260 Panama Street \nStanford, CA 94305 \n \nBefore the \nU.S. House of Representatives \nEnergy and Commerce Committee \nSubcommittee on Energy and Power \n“Climate Science and the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Regulations ” \n10:00 a.m., March 8, 2011 \nRoom 2123, Rayburn House Office Building \n \n \n3 Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author and \ndo not necessarily reflect those of the Carnegie Institution for Science or the IPCC \n4 The Carnegie Institution for Science is a not -for-profit organization dedicated to basic research for the benefit of \nhumanity. 3 \n \nClimate Science and the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Regulations \n \nIntroduction \n I thank Chairman Upton, Ranking Member W axman , Chairman of the Subcommittee \nWhitfield, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee R ush, and the other Members of the \nCommittee for the opportunity to speak with you today on observed impacts of climate on \nimportant processes in our country . My name is Christopher Field. I am director of the \nDepartment of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution for Science , a not -for-profit \norganization dedicated to basic research for the benefit of humanity. In addition, I am a professor in the Department of Environmental Earth System Science and the Depar tment of \nBiology at Stanford University. Since September of 2008, I have served as co- chair of Working \nGroup 2 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Working Group 2 is tasked with assessing scientific information concerning impacts of climate change, options for adaptation to \nclimate changes that cannot be avoided, and vulnerability to climate change. \n My personal research focuses on interactions among climate, the carbon cycle, and \necosystem processes, using approaches that range from ecosys tem-scale climate manipulations to \nglobal climate models. I have published over 200 peer -reviewed papers in leading scientific \njournals, and was a coordinating lead author on the topic “North America” for the Working Group 2 contribution to the IPCC Fourt h Assessment Report. I have served on many committees \nof the National Research Council and International Scientific Organizations. I am an elected member of the US National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences as well as an elected Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of \nScience. \n In today’s testimony, I will focus on two aspects of observed sensitivity of important \nprocesses to climate. The two processes are agricultural yields in the United States and wildfire \nin the Western United States. The sensitivities I want to discuss today are based on observations \nand not on simulations . All of the material I will be discussing today is based on publications in \npeer-reviewed scientific journals or on national or international assessments of thousands of \nscientific sources. \n \nRobust Foundations of Current Knowledge \n The starting point for the material I want to discuss today is a series of robust conclusions \nfrom climate science, synthesized in a number of recent major assessments including two 2010 \nreports from the US National Academy of Sciences, “ Climate Stabilization Targets: Emissions, \nConcentrations, and Impacts over Decades to Millennia” (Solomon 2010) , and “Advancing the \nScience of Climate Change” ( Matson 2010) , the 2009 report from the US Global Change \nResearch Program, “ Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States” ( Karl et al. 2009) and \nthe Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (IPCC 2007a , c, b). These documents provide a \nscientifically rich picture of a c hanging climate, the mechanisms that underlie observed and \nprojected changes, impacts of climate change on individuals, ecosystems, economies, and regions, and the costs and benefits of changing practices to decrease the amount of climate change from a bus iness -as-usual scenario. \n 4 \n The following 10 points, quoted from ( Karl et al. 2009 ), form the foundation for any \ndiscussion of climate change and its impacts: \n“1. Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human- induced. \nGlobal temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human induced emissions of heat -trapping gases. \n 2. Climate changes are underway in the United States and are projected to grow. Climate -related changes are alread y observed in the United States and its coastal waters. These \ninclude increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice -free seasons in the \nocean an d on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows. These changes are \nprojected to grow. \n 3. Widespread climate -related impacts are occurring now and are expected to increase. \nClimate changes are already affecting water, energy, transp ortation, agriculture, ecosystems, and \nhealth. These impacts are different from region to region and will grow under projected climate change. \n 4. Climate change will stress water resources. \nWater is an issue in every region, but the nature of the potentia l impacts varies. Drought, related \nto reduced precipitation, increased evaporation, and increased water loss from plants, is an important issue in many regions, especially in the West. Floods and water quality problems are likely to be amplified by climate change in most regions. Declines in mountain snowpack are \nimportant in the West and Alaska where snowpack provides vital natural water storage. \n 5. Crop and livestock production will be increasingly challenged. \nMany crops show positive responses to elevat ed carbon dioxide and low levels of warming, but \nhigher levels of warming often negatively affect growth and yields. Increased pests, water stress, diseases, and weather extremes will pose adaptation challenges for crop and livestock production. 6. Coastal areas are at increasing risk from sea -level rise and storm surge. \nSea-level rise and storm surge place many U.S. coastal areas at increasing risk of erosion and \nflooding, especially along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, Pacific Islands, and parts of Alaska . \nEnergy and transportation infrastructure and other property in coastal areas are very likely to be adversely affected. \n 7. Risks to human health will increase. Harmful health impacts of climate change are related to increasing heat stress, waterborne diseases, poor air quality, extreme weather events, and diseases transmitted by insects and \nrodents. Reduced cold stress provides some benefits. Robust public health infrastructure can reduce the potential for negative impacts. \n 8. Climate change will intera ct with many social and environmental stresses. 5 \n Climate change will combine with pollution, population growth, overuse of resources, \nurbanization, and other social, economic, and environmental stresses to create larger impacts than from any of these factor s alone. \n 9. Thresholds will be crossed, leading to large changes in climate and ecosystems. \nThere are a variety of thresholds in the climate system and ecosystems. These thresholds determine, for example, the presence of sea ice and permafrost, and the survival of species, from fish to insect pests, with implications for society. With further climate change, the crossing of additional thresholds is expected. 10. Future climate change and its impacts depend on choices made today. \nThe amount and rate of f uture climate change depend primarily on current and future human -\ncaused emissions of heat -trapping gases and airborne particles. Responses involve reducing \nemissions to limit future warming, and adapting to the changes that are unavoidable.” \n \nRecent Resul ts: Observed Responses of the Temperature Sensitivity of US Agriculture \n Globally and in the US, advancements in agriculture are among the crow ning \naccomplishments of human ingenuity . Especially over the last century, yields have increased \ndramatically ( Lobell et al. 2009) , more than keeping pace with the growth of human population. \nOne recent analysis concludes that agricultural intensification since 1 961 has increased yields so \nmuch that t he area in crops has not needed to change , even as demand has soared (Burney et al. \n2010) . As a consequence, intensification of agriculture has prevented deforestation that \notherwise would have emitted 161 billion tons of carbon to the atmosphere. \n \n Over recent decades, yields of most major crops have increased at 1-2% per year (Lobell \nand Field 2007) , but an increasing body of evidence indicates that obtaining these yield increases \nis becoming more and more difficult, as climate change acts to resist or reverse yield increases from improvements in management and breeding. Using global records of yield trends in the world’s six major food crops since 1961, my colleague David Lobell and I (Lobell and Field \n2007) concluded that, at the global scale, effects of warming are already visible, with global \nyields of wheat, corn, and barley reduced since 1981 by 40 million tons per year below the levels that would occur without the warming. As of 2002 (the last year ana lyzed in the study), this \nrepresents an economic loss of approximately $5 billion per year. \n In the United States, the observed temperature sensitivity of three major crops is even \nmore striking. Based on a careful county -by county analysis of patterns o f climate and yields of \ncorn, soybeans, and cotton, Schlenker and Roberts ( Schlenker and Roberts 2009) concluded that \nobserved yields from all farms and farmers are relatively insensitive to temperature up to a threshold but fall rapidly as temperatures rise above the threshold. For farms in the United State s, the temperature threshold is 84 ˚F for corn, 86˚F for soybeans, and 90˚F for cotton. For \ncorn, a single day at 104 ˚F instead of 84˚F reduces observed yields by about 7%. These \ntemperature sensitivities are based on observed responses, including data fr om all of the US \ncounties that grow cotton and all of the Eastern counties that grow corn or soybeans. These are not simulated responses. They are observed in the aggregate yields of thousands of farms in \nthousands of locations. 6 \n The temperature sensiti vity observed by Schlenker and Roberts ( Schlenker and Roberts \n2009) suggests a challenging future for US agriculture. Unless we can develop varieties with \nimproved heat tolerance, modest warming (based on the IPCC B1 scenario) by the end of the 21st \ncentury will reduce yields by 30 -46%. With a high estimate of climate change ( based on the \nIPCC A1FI scenario ), the loss of yield is 63- 82%. These t hree major crops, in some ways the \ncore of US agriculture, are exquisitely sensitive to warming. This result is very clear. We may \nbe able to breed warming tolerant varieties, and it is possible that some of the yield losses due to warming will be compensated by positive responses to elevated atmospheric CO\n2 (Long et al. \n2006) , but we will b e trying to improve yields in a setting where warming is like an anchor \npulling us back. \n \nRecent Results: Observed Responses of the Temperature Sensitivity of Wildfires in the \nWestern US \n Wildfire is a common threat in the Western US. While historical, lo w-intensity wildfires \ncan play an important role in sustaining the health of ecosystems ( Minnich 1983) , large, high-\nintensity wildfires destroy lives and homes, impact air quality, degrade watersheds, reduce economic activity, and eliminate wildlife habitat. In recent years, suppression costs have been \nover $1 billion per annum ( Littell et al. 2009 ). \n Westerling and colleagues ( Westerling et al. 2006) compiled a database of 1166 large \nwildfires in the US during the period from 1970 to 2003. They observed a large increase in fire frequency, duration, and in the length of the fire season after the mid 1980s. This increase in fire activity was strongly related to warm spring and summer temperatures. Over this period, the length of time from snow -melt in the spring to the first snow -fall in the autumn is a good \npredictor of the fire risk. \n Littell and colleagues ( Littell et al. 2009 ) looked at a longer series of fire records and \nanalyzed the data for relationships with temperature and rainfall. They found that, for most Western ecosystems, climate is a strong predictor of wildfire are a burned, with current -year \ntemperature explaining a significant amount of the variability in most regions. The striking feature of these results, based on observations and not simulations is the sensitivity. For most of the West, the annual area burned inc reases by 200 to over 600% for every 1.8 ˚F of warming \n(Solomon 2010) . It is only in the driest regions, where warming makes it too dry for fire, that \nthere is not a strong positive response. Based on these observed sensitivities, warming of 1.8 ˚F \nis expected to increase the area bu rned from 1.3 million acres per year (the 1970- 2003 average) \nto 4.5 million acres ( Solomon 2010) . \n \nConclusion \n Many lines of robust, independent evidence support the conclusion that the climate has \nbeen warming over the past century and that human emissions of heat -trapping gases are very \nlikely responsible for much of the warming since the middle of the last century (IPCC 2007d) . \nWe are already seeing a wide range of impacts of these climate changes ( IPCC 2007e ). \nAlthough there is scientific uncertainty about the amount of future warming, it is very clear that, \nunless emissions of heat -trapping gases decrease dramatically, the planet will warm substantially \nin coming decades. New data on sensitivities, here I have discussed US agriculture and wildfire , \nemphasize the magnitude of the risk for the United States. Based on observations, not 7 \n simulations, the sensitivities to warming of both agriculture and wildfire are more than sufficient \nto cause pervasive regional harm, with even modest warming. \n \n \n \n 8 \n Literature cited \n \nBurney, J. A., S. J. Davis, and D. B. Lobell. 2010. Greenhouse gas mitigation by agricultural \nintensification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107:12052. \nIPCC. 2007a. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of \nWorking Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, C.E., Eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. \nIPCC. 2007b. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the \nFourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York. \nIPCC. 2007c. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Contribution of Working \nGroup I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. \nIPCC. 2007d. Summary for Policymakers. Pages 1 -21 in S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. \nChen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M.Tignor, and H. L. Miller, editors. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge \nUniversity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. \nIPCC. 2007e. Summary for Policymakers. Pages 7 -22 in M. L. Parry, O. F. Canziani, J. P. \nPalutikof, P. J. van der Linden, and C. E. Hanson, editors. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. \nKarl, T. R., J. M. Melillo, and T. C. Peterson, editors. 2009. Globa l Climate Change Impacts in \nthe United States. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. \nLittell, J. S., D. McKenzie, D. L. Peterson, and A. L. Westerling. 2009. Climate and wildfire area \nburned in western US ecoprovinces , 1916- 2003. Ecological Applications 19:1003- 1021. \nLobell, D. B., K. G. Cassman, and C. B. Field. 2009. Crop Yield Gaps: Their Importance, \nMagnitudes, and Causes. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 34 :179- 204. \nLobell, D. B. and C. B. Field. 2007. G lobal scale climate –crop yield relationships and the \nimpacts of recent warming. Environmental Research Letters 2:doi:10.1088/1748-9326/1082/1081/014002. \nLong, S. P., E. A. Ainsworth, A. D. B. Leakey, J. N οsberger, and D. R. Ort. 2006. Food for \nthought: Low er-than-expected crop yield stimulation with rising CO2 concentrations. \nScience 312:1918- 1921. \nMatson, P. 2010. Advancing the Science of Climate Change. National Academies Press, \nWashington, D.C. \nMinnich, R. A. 1983. Fire mosaics in Southern Califonia and Northern Baja California. Science \n219:1287- 1294. \nSchlenker, W. and M. Roberts. 2009. Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to \nUS crop yields under climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106:15594. 9 \n Solomon, S. 2010. Climate Stabilization Targets: Emissions, Concentrations, and Impacts over \nDecades to Millennia. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. \nWesterling, A. L., H. G. Hidalgo, D. R. Cayan, and T. W. Swetnam. 2006. Warming and earlier \nspring increase western U.S. forest wildfire activity. Science 313:940-943. \n \n " }

[ 0.03048577532172203, -0.025367775931954384, -0.004212501458823681, 0.04103226214647293, -0.02039255015552044, 0.045072466135025024, -0.04468092322349548, 0.060320429503917694, -0.02191336825489998, 0.04185505583882332, 0.052428655326366425, -0.00319852982647717, -0.06593577563762665, 0.030604714527726173, -0.054320529103279114, -0.007048080209642649, 0.08006290346384048, 0.0011777715990319848, -0.05913065746426582, -0.0023432797752320766, 0.11630433797836304, -0.0019906291272491217, -0.034680332988500595, 0.031724754720926285, 0.007408737670630217, 0.013400205411016941, 0.022719750180840492, -0.09120821952819824, -0.030732011422514915, -0.013090237975120544, 0.017620190978050232, 0.04327002540230751, 0.05166008323431015, 0.002589156851172447, 0.08545487374067307, 0.011702831834554672, 0.11695830523967743, 0.06950148940086365, 0.017994217574596405, 0.05332277715206146, -0.11850468069314957, 0.018705615773797035, -0.04993973299860954, 0.056862954050302505, -0.06230391934514046, -0.0042464216239750385, -0.11557980626821518, -0.022350667044520378, -0.054535843431949615, 0.0486973412334919, 0.012115995399653912, -0.01738123781979084, 0.021330727264285088, 0.02356652170419693, -0.015510322526097298, 0.017842499539256096, -0.007509689778089523, -0.053458936512470245, -0.052850957959890366, 0.028679044917225838, -0.14243514835834503, -0.013582279905676842, -0.0020482013933360577, 0.0021660111378878355, 0.011735745705664158, 0.024696143344044685, -0.07475291937589645, -0.032150980085134506, -0.018052497878670692, -0.07141514122486115, -0.010698673315346241, 0.07445287704467773, 0.022755900397896767, -0.04770723730325699, 0.04096660763025284, 0.04505623131990433, 0.020205600187182426, 0.1037057414650917, 0.10865190625190735, -0.08686170727014542, 0.0057486058212816715, 0.03197218477725983, -0.0306426752358675, -0.00232518557459116, 0.07559391111135483, 0.025583937764167786, -0.011148734018206596, -0.018326913937926292, 0.03462867811322212, -0.050723787397146225, 0.04058011621236801, 0.03776528686285019, -0.037413593381643295, -0.036029186099767685, 0.0067064035683870316, 0.037381939589977264, -0.06220988929271698, -0.0797560065984726, 0.007200057618319988, 0.003062819829210639, -0.045991916209459305, 0.012933893129229546, 0.034559112042188644, -0.06809115409851074, -0.039170041680336, -0.03865509852766991, 0.10336358845233917, 0.012071731500327587, -0.02458115853369236, -0.01862506754696369, 0.027291717007756233, -0.04642072692513466, -0.006322947330772877, 0.031385987997055054, 0.005251205060631037, -0.06566015630960464, 0.031992945820093155, -0.010973974131047726, 0.028557121753692627, -0.003933382220566273, -0.013219348154962063, 0.04234805330634117, -0.03153753653168678, -0.02999221347272396, -0.04631628841161728, -0.08834095299243927, -0.09481404721736908, 3.9676706942434374e-33, 0.003279919968917966, 0.045791562646627426, -0.021284030750393867, -0.05534974858164787, -0.08606267720460892, -0.05219091475009918, 0.06195308640599251, 0.003778415033593774, 0.00047932693269103765, -0.0031749692279845476, -0.04023848846554756, 0.028454342857003212, -0.0031421228777617216, 0.0670115277171135, 0.03194443881511688, 0.006504177115857601, -0.052855122834444046, 0.05569899082183838, -0.04509509354829788, 0.0328250527381897, -0.04404488578438759, 0.004518838599324226, -0.008412733674049377, -0.05670759826898575, -0.028144370764493942, 0.04363559931516647, 0.002620438579469919, 0.014644252136349678, 0.0505562461912632, -0.018440989777445793, 0.07337573915719986, 0.016945550218224525, 0.03151687979698181, 0.05815249681472778, -0.0011495609069243073, -0.035193536430597305, 0.05774145945906639, 0.03018128126859665, 0.006418365519493818, -0.049547258764505386, 0.022570859640836716, 0.03606237471103668, 0.07753335684537888, -0.012455262243747711, 0.019567234441637993, 0.037591394037008286, 0.07112918794155121, -0.01336057297885418, -0.01563391089439392, 0.01943882182240486, -0.024433240294456482, 0.0542483851313591, -0.14153815805912018, -0.07956941425800323, -0.06157688796520233, -0.08024870604276657, 0.04153876006603241, 0.037191975861787796, 0.03526163101196289, 0.027946578338742256, -0.10673686861991882, 0.013536833226680756, -0.018541768193244934, -0.05602031946182251, -0.008142407983541489, -0.021149538457393646, -0.011115924455225468, -0.04581783339381218, 0.07636678218841553, -0.010202661156654358, -0.023573148995637894, -0.0014365541283041239, -0.009360256604850292, 0.05368334800004959, -0.03232255205512047, -0.04877795651555061, 0.07372494786977768, 0.0009700975497253239, 0.060764241963624954, -0.0010782855097204447, -0.0409020259976387, -0.032721299678087234, -0.009998963214457035, -0.05942735821008682, 0.0352824442088604, -0.04242512956261635, 0.04457180202007294, 0.02392166666686535, -0.015613250434398651, -0.01043189037591219, 0.06500677019357681, 0.007434308063238859, -0.1021360233426094, 0.0773029550909996, 0.05181877687573433, -6.353563129241788e-33, -0.011018908582627773, 0.053636834025382996, -0.024438895285129547, -0.010491673834621906, -0.002724782098084688, 0.02320193126797676, -0.007772938348352909, -0.06180966645479202, 0.05735377222299576, -0.03320756182074547, -0.08950036019086838, -0.031284913420677185, -0.02642785757780075, 0.09252462536096573, -0.02398671954870224, -0.073494091629982, -0.020829034969210625, 0.036891017109155655, 0.021419527009129524, -0.0352749265730381, 0.035967905074357986, 0.11893647909164429, 0.02638615109026432, 0.04832452908158302, 0.011431575752794743, -0.013666409999132156, -0.10712134838104248, -0.03220234811306, -0.004277912434190512, 0.07468575984239578, 0.05148207023739815, -0.13744542002677917, -0.059958986937999725, 0.05000900849699974, -0.06426423043012619, -0.08230467885732651, -0.03238426893949509, 0.05208245664834976, -0.06848961114883423, 0.02466791309416294, 0.03658595308661461, -0.05431372672319412, 0.008187961764633656, 0.041375644505023956, 0.02390214428305626, 0.06191094219684601, 0.03770846500992775, -0.07916424423456192, -0.00614594854414463, 0.007854023016989231, -0.08159924298524857, -0.016173701733350754, -0.02876671403646469, 0.004860277753323317, 0.07024998217821121, 0.04854019358754158, 0.08269341289997101, -0.051004208624362946, -0.027463845908641815, -0.07418810576200485, 0.07627057284116745, -0.00443711644038558, -0.11329095810651779, -0.0019109395798295736, 0.051318395882844925, -0.043277714401483536, 0.04239629954099655, -0.10409583151340485, 0.028945649042725563, 0.034110888838768005, -0.010585791431367397, 0.06122523546218872, 0.034325797110795975, -0.11372507363557816, -0.009655112400650978, 0.027077147737145424, 0.016462916508316994, 0.05749408155679703, -0.013584294356405735, 0.09379653632640839, -0.004943470936268568, -0.010944284498691559, -0.022678252309560776, -0.050619740039110184, -0.029744621366262436, -0.059068433940410614, 0.10656678676605225, -0.02838210016489029, -0.05335976555943489, 0.06435711681842804, -0.07292173057794571, 0.08235817402601242, 0.0254029780626297, -0.018377631902694702, 0.05570346489548683, -5.388029222785917e-8, 0.07932134717702866, 0.008758176118135452, -0.02866267040371895, 0.053221266716718674, 0.08656765520572662, -0.05087268725037575, -0.08652404695749283, 0.027075016871094704, -0.03617817163467407, 0.1126025915145874, 0.04963397607207298, 0.02828303351998329, -0.050064366310834885, -0.04432452842593193, -0.0035386185627430677, -0.006091744638979435, -0.03764726221561432, -0.02420516312122345, -0.026439126580953598, -0.033714525401592255, -0.006976427976042032, 0.025707149878144264, -0.03547156602144241, -0.0007342477329075336, -0.024888090789318085, 0.005979410372674465, 0.030651314184069633, 0.05159395560622215, -0.046564072370529175, -0.013982522301375866, 0.07241865247488022, -0.00023108597088139504, 0.030971383675932884, -0.08112244307994843, 0.058044180274009705, -0.054649993777275085, -0.08783320337533951, 0.09912649542093277, 0.12265312671661377, 0.06037222221493721, -0.028508592396974564, -0.0707780122756958, 0.033493224531412125, 0.021371033042669296, 0.09862232953310013, 0.010974113829433918, -0.1231403797864914, -0.09322915971279144, 0.05744623765349388, -0.04842285066843033, -0.006445708684623241, -0.10557906329631805, -0.014901264570653439, -0.06312458962202072, 0.0014547371538355947, -0.002631488488987088, -0.021759215742349625, -0.012763237580657005, -0.07837659865617752, -0.04560156166553497, 0.08971792459487915, 0.05244596675038338, -0.031036850064992905, 0.05567917600274086 ]

{ "pdf_file": "B3LIWULH323OKSAJATTM7QK5O7KKYMCA.pdf", "text": "SDL: 5891 LEA: 580513030000 \n The New York State School Report Card \n Fiscal Accountability Supplement \n for \n Central Islip Union Free School District \nNew York State Education Law and the Commissioner' s Regulations require the attachment of the NYS \nSchool Report Card to the public school district budge t proposal. The regulations require that certain \nexpenditure ratios for general education and special edu cation students be reported and compared with ratios \nfor similar districts and all public schools. The re quired ratios for this district are reported below. \n \n2005-2006 School Year General Education Special Education \nInstructional Expenditures $70,751,415 $34,557,510 \nPupils 6,191 839 This \nSchool \nDistrict Expenditures Per Pupil $11,428 $41,189 \nInstructional Expenditures $2,072,067,012 $799,717,976 \nPupils 223,680 36,767 Similar \nDistrict \nGroup Expenditures Per Pupil $9,264 $21,751 \nInstructional Expenditures $25,418,059,645 $8,990,169,173 \nPupils 2,772,347 402,175 All Public \nSchools in \nNY State Expenditures Per Pupil $9,168 $22,354 \nSimilar District Group Description: High Need/Resource Capacity Urban or Suburban \nInstructional Expenditures for General Educ ation are K-12 expenditures for classroom instruction (excluding Special Education) plus a \nproration of building level administrative and instructional support expenditures. These expenditures include amounts for inst ruction of \npupils with disabilities in a general education setting. \nThe pupil count for General Education is K-12 average daily membersh ip plus K-12 pupils for whom the district pays tuition to a nother \nschool district. This number represents all pupils, including both those classified as having disabilities and those not so cl assified. For \ndistricts in which a county jail is located, this number includes incarcerated youth to whom the district must provide an educa tion \nprogram. \nInstructional Expenditures for Special Education are K-12 expendi tures for students with disabilities (including summer special education \nexpenditures) plus a proration of building-level adm inistrative and instructional support expenditures. \nThe pupil count for Special Education is a count of K-12 students with disabilities as of December 1, 2005 plus students for wh om the \ndistrict receives tuiti on from another district. \nExpenditures Per Pupil is the simple arithmetic ratio of Instru ctional Expenditures to Pupils. The total cost of instruction fo r pupils with \ndisabilities may include both general and special education expenditu res. Special education services provided in the general ed ucation \nclassroom may benefit students not cl assified as havi ng disabilities. \nDistrict expenditures such as transportati on, debt service, and district-wide adminis tration are not included in these values. The numbers \nused to compute the statistics on this page were collected on the St ate Aid Form A, the State Aid Form F, and the School Distri ct Annual \nFinancial Report (ST-3). \nSimilar District Groups are identified according to the Need-to -Resource-Capacity Index defined and used in the Annual Report t o the \nGovernor and Legislature on the Educati onal Status of the State's Schools. SDL: 5891 LEA: 580513030000 \n The New York State School Report Card \n Information about Students with Disabilities \n for \n Central Islip Union Free School District \nNew York State Education Law and the Commissioner' s Regulations require the attachment of the NYS \nSchool Report Card to the public school district bu dget proposal. These regulations require that the \npercentage of students with disabilities receiving servi ces outside of general classroom settings and the \nclassification rate of students with disabilities for the dist rict be reported and compared with percentages for \nsimilar districts and all public schools. The required percentages for this district are reported below. \n \nStudent Counts as of \nDecember 1, 2006\n This District Total of All Public School \nDistricts \nStudent Placement -- Time Outside a Regular Classroom\n Count of \nStudents with \nDisabilities Percentage of \nStudents with \nDisabilities Percentage of \nStudents with \nDisabilities \n20% or less 266 33.4% 53.5% \n21% to 60% 162 20.4% 13.0% \nMore than 60% 271 34.0% 24.7% \nSeparate Settings 76 9.5% 6.3% \nOther Settings 21 2.6% 2.5% \nThe source data for the statistics in this table were reported on the Required Report of the Number of Students with Disabiliti es Provided \nSpecial Education in Regular School-based Programs, in Separate Settings, and in Other Settings (PD-1/4). The counts are numbe rs of \nstudents reported in the several placements for school-age programs (ages 6-21) on December 1, 2006. The PD-1/4 reports the \nproportions of time students are outside general education classrooms, regardless of the amount and cost of special education s ervices \nthey receive. Rounding of percentage values may cause t hem to sum to a number slightly different from 100%. \nSchool-age Students with Di sabilities Classification Rate \n2006-07 This District * Total of All Public School \nDistricts * \nResident Classification Rate 12.1% 12.4% \nThis rate is the ratio of the count of school-age (4-21) resi dents in the district who are cla ssified as having disabilities, d ivided by a \ncomputed measure of the total district-resident school-age popul ation (including public school students, nonpublic school stude nts, and \nstudents receiving home instruction). Source data are drawn from the School District Report of the Number of Students with Di sabilities \n(PD-1/4) and the Basic Education Data System (BEDS). " }

[ -0.11381734907627106, 0.09364276379346848, -0.06641782820224762, -0.037425559014081955, 0.08900051563978195, 0.0455593466758728, -0.014551184140145779, 0.04578951746225357, -0.001196631113998592, 0.001195690012536943, 0.12085902690887451, -0.020161345601081848, 0.0253503005951643, -0.051783524453639984, -0.07214787602424622, 0.010114524513483047, -0.08422812819480896, 0.03937474265694618, 0.03003966435790062, -0.014899365603923798, -0.0338221974670887, 0.04728478193283081, 0.027185402810573578, -0.04545232653617859, 0.012952486053109169, 0.1245792880654335, -0.027004407718777657, 0.03995315358042717, 0.0019105933606624603, -0.083363376557827, -0.01222381554543972, 0.021030809730291367, 0.053601235151290894, 0.039811454713344574, 0.08655159175395966, -0.00422350037842989, -0.03716094046831131, -0.01361006498336792, 0.010654396377503872, 0.007824518717825413, 0.02598327398300171, -0.06359534710645676, 0.06420286744832993, 0.08759043365716934, -0.007429959252476692, 0.019188523292541504, -0.05517859011888504, 0.01497638039290905, -0.006358008366078138, 0.036114227026700974, -0.04017161950469017, -0.08691748231649399, -0.06553078442811966, 0.1164768785238266, -0.0176276583224535, -0.03663891181349754, -0.059121713042259216, 0.030244847759604454, 0.02223464660346508, 0.0030900808051228523, 0.015753690153360367, 0.002662514103576541, -0.02121710404753685, 0.03362279757857323, 0.060436517000198364, -0.021690938621759415, 0.03165517374873161, -0.03707939013838768, 0.075111985206604, 0.010198134928941727, 0.02234615944325924, 0.03685130551457405, -0.06598759442567825, -0.030991308391094208, -0.0843665674328804, 0.05802115797996521, -0.009044421836733818, 0.020104844123125076, 0.031767625361680984, -0.1480146050453186, -0.03793366998434067, -0.003018181538209319, -0.008008399046957493, 0.014703002758324146, 0.05304700881242752, 0.019313456490635872, -0.01670575700700283, -0.02541659027338028, 0.00627164775505662, 0.03989880904555321, 0.05905580148100853, -0.010812404565513134, 0.05617181956768036, 0.0004755397094413638, -0.11015959829092026, 0.00037610545405186713, 0.040339209139347076, 0.0876845195889473, 0.07111388444900513, 0.06732282787561417, -0.03390700742602348, -0.02382945455610752, -0.003507404588162899, 0.035652220249176025, 0.01627763733267784, -0.01343616098165512, -0.02840436063706875, 0.08008231222629547, -0.06869055330753326, -0.055570829659700394, 0.025538675487041473, 0.05808024853467941, 0.01865745149552822, -0.042830660939216614, 0.041387591511011124, 0.033026084303855896, 0.061174843460321426, 0.07850214093923569, -0.0065418146550655365, -0.015191460028290749, 0.012280230410397053, -0.004606166388839483, -0.0658889040350914, -0.05658352002501488, -0.17483633756637573, -0.0674712136387825, 0.025711219757795334, 7.88191737429391e-33, 0.04267018288373947, -0.08651801943778992, -0.06036127731204033, 0.033641498535871506, 0.04657701775431633, 0.03023228794336319, 0.003706652205437422, 0.005851278081536293, -0.06493277102708817, 0.0534561425447464, -0.0022869009990245104, -0.024880094453692436, 0.06983467936515808, -0.1291443407535553, -0.09969101846218109, 0.0217384435236454, -0.053037069737911224, 0.025937484577298164, -0.08958584815263748, -0.006850874051451683, 0.0827213004231453, -0.013101080432534218, 0.011693018488585949, 0.055047519505023956, 0.0177186019718647, 0.041691552847623825, 0.0455242283642292, -0.05946332588791847, 0.028808321803808212, 0.016495412215590477, 0.10038597881793976, -0.0008550627389922738, 0.04302766174077988, -0.016993822529911995, 0.08483828604221344, 0.12132199853658676, 0.039101600646972656, -0.0508517287671566, 0.0470292866230011, -0.015899812802672386, -0.012166379950940609, -0.021406853571534157, -0.0025380069855600595, -0.031195277348160744, 0.04365959390997887, -0.06247559189796448, -0.0007193777128122747, 0.010395858436822891, -0.029288627207279205, 0.034356456249952316, -0.007678207475692034, 0.014067834243178368, 0.014266190119087696, -0.04216122254729271, -0.05956796184182167, -0.00853606965392828, -0.03882688656449318, 0.0710872933268547, 0.004810983780771494, 0.07411021739244461, 0.07100643217563629, 0.11126109957695007, -0.1085541695356369, -0.015831459313631058, -0.04664669930934906, -0.074763722717762, -0.04209044203162193, -0.055761516094207764, -0.0004628516035154462, -0.021601563319563866, 0.008887998759746552, -0.028910988941788673, 0.07239729166030884, -0.018634693697094917, -0.03838185593485832, -0.034647807478904724, -0.050920821726322174, 0.015013034455478191, -0.09852287918329239, -0.0494241900742054, -0.10721053928136826, 0.007691246457397938, -0.004309935495257378, 0.006771897431463003, 0.026660131290555, 0.03817182406783104, -0.03362801671028137, -0.07316098362207413, -0.1070774644613266, -0.010000709444284439, 0.035866640508174896, 0.032997168600559235, 0.04580582305788994, -0.005853292532265186, 0.04013561084866524, -6.0285837569615504e-33, -0.012336774729192257, -0.015254589729011059, -0.00424016872420907, -0.020692462101578712, 0.022234633564949036, -0.047467540949583054, 0.017287123948335648, 0.019388733431696892, -0.02953808382153511, -0.0067814551293849945, 0.07139772176742554, -0.034505363553762436, -0.014880743809044361, 0.030925743281841278, -0.023699117824435234, 0.029498863965272903, -0.03708138316869736, 0.04825945571064949, -0.09015949815511703, 0.05626968294382095, 0.10478624701499939, 0.05741259455680847, 0.01164755318313837, 0.10759875178337097, -0.00858017522841692, 0.014004719443619251, 0.040434010326862335, -0.008939800783991814, -0.002076090546324849, 0.05550416186451912, 0.0035001682117581367, -0.029801836237311363, -0.13082487881183624, 0.12082942575216293, 0.0003474112309049815, -0.09248991310596466, 0.05163857713341713, -0.027564959600567818, 0.01138458400964737, 0.06908363103866577, 0.04520741105079651, 0.01578933373093605, -0.015550211071968079, 0.05315691977739334, -0.020944012328982353, 0.06325044482946396, 0.12334264069795609, 0.009368477389216423, 0.03321205452084541, -0.04454374313354492, -0.012690568342804909, 0.010217028670012951, 0.01761459931731224, 0.10402477532625198, -0.00019236835942137986, 0.018145572394132614, 0.06316850334405899, -0.05844198912382126, -0.02966330014169216, 0.014425504952669144, 0.07147031277418137, 0.08652779459953308, -0.04093537852168083, -0.003089903388172388, 0.0916447639465332, -0.04018384590744972, -0.0494050607085228, 0.004399352706968784, 0.0206059031188488, -0.0551481731235981, -0.023816552013158798, -0.02302204817533493, 0.007580758538097143, -0.11332698166370392, 0.017815450206398964, -0.04207472875714302, -0.029682423919439316, 0.01081767212599516, -0.07571165263652802, -0.028495296835899353, 0.018179189413785934, -0.011296771466732025, 0.010114329867064953, 0.06783438473939896, -0.010050310753285885, 0.04060479998588562, 0.06584233045578003, -0.04695349186658859, 0.029929185286164284, 0.034025225788354874, -0.08426997065544128, 0.04520539566874504, 0.058572959154844284, 0.03370828554034233, -0.008837280794978142, -3.663551240151719e-8, -0.053370945155620575, -0.027310416102409363, -0.026825640350580215, -0.023336896672844887, 0.09484074264764786, 0.015385027974843979, -0.045594409108161926, 0.006411252077668905, -0.0390242263674736, -0.03714737296104431, 0.038703251630067825, 0.02194986306130886, -0.06647764891386032, -0.09779956936836243, -0.000026140309273614548, -0.036809924989938736, -0.04507068544626236, 0.006503479089587927, -0.027592718601226807, -0.01425787340849638, -0.015395018272101879, -0.05508466437458992, 0.06488845497369766, 0.052329227328300476, -0.020834844559431076, 0.04902387037873268, 0.01986703649163246, 0.05559510365128517, 0.007241379469633102, -0.044811639934778214, -0.02596467174589634, 0.05441172048449516, 0.047303635627031326, -0.05513818934559822, -0.030723445117473602, 0.012767640873789787, 0.04246696084737778, 0.037681229412555695, -0.026667386293411255, -0.02525407075881958, -0.01609015464782715, -0.01578446663916111, 0.00627251947298646, 0.08531638234853745, 0.0057132956571877, -0.028920656070113182, -0.038005657494068146, -0.012686582282185555, -0.047415267676115036, -0.08381791412830353, -0.02759416773915291, -0.13609862327575684, 0.0327620729804039, 0.014787514694035053, -0.09563305974006653, 0.022741731256246567, 0.0982036292552948, 0.028246713802218437, -0.06505606323480606, -0.034371666610240936, 0.02424575760960579, 0.03204774856567383, 0.05648045614361763, -0.004098332487046719 ]

{ "pdf_file": "TYQ2Y24KMBHFOCYET2QDX4C4YBNM7CBY.pdf", "text": "Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 311 Filed 06/30/04 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 311 Filed 06/30/04 Page 2 of 2" }

[ 0.02919343300163746, -0.018069276586174965, -0.0939931869506836, -0.049362730234861374, 0.026629110798239708, 0.016209222376346588, 0.04024363309144974, 0.08647608757019043, -0.020821362733840942, -0.013054772280156612, 0.0629536360502243, 0.04475833475589752, 0.0375913605093956, -0.022120650857686996, -0.07544343918561935, -0.006384748034179211, 0.05530644580721855, -0.023660792037844658, -0.05454956367611885, 0.05774984136223793, 0.003870707470923662, -0.014551046304404736, -0.037774499505758286, -0.036168377846479416, -0.008998378179967403, -0.04267606884241104, 0.07086100429296494, -0.010234978049993515, 0.005308971274644136, -0.044909410178661346, -0.010385499335825443, 0.027127467095851898, 0.06757450103759766, -0.07109242677688599, 0.06511931866407394, 0.022483834996819496, 0.03925780579447746, -0.03383617103099823, -0.019781537353992462, -0.008712434209883213, 0.05682039260864258, -0.08244389295578003, 0.02838934399187565, -0.06710479408502579, 0.02422124706208706, -0.04248194769024849, 0.029683465138077736, -0.05804872885346413, -0.00963946059346199, 0.02755059115588665, -0.06473693251609802, -0.01387715619057417, -0.04359333962202072, -0.06052695959806442, -0.03173024207353592, 0.007318576797842979, -0.02186001092195511, -0.03160277009010315, -0.0077177248895168304, 0.023258576169610023, 0.03084149956703186, 0.07720479369163513, -0.02262093871831894, 0.08347614854574203, 0.16491450369358063, 0.019336186349391937, -0.012113193981349468, 0.002983737736940384, -0.07686884701251984, -0.009876654483377934, 0.015274378471076488, -0.11297620087862015, -0.030604228377342224, -0.05282505601644516, 0.00474513927474618, -0.03886883333325386, -0.011670119129121304, 0.05031879246234894, 0.02089652605354786, -0.09566106647253036, 0.04542122781276703, -0.06375068426132202, -0.08411642909049988, -0.021475089713931084, -0.08654801547527313, -0.01516900397837162, 0.03696274757385254, -0.05317683517932892, 0.056596845388412476, 0.01083830650895834, 0.08712026476860046, -0.013126746751368046, 0.042499348521232605, 0.019827866926789284, -0.022044427692890167, 0.01632797345519066, -0.1641111522912979, -0.026528583839535713, 0.018237117677927017, 0.005953474901616573, -0.001464583445340395, 0.06642894446849823, -0.007005190476775169, 0.022610342130064964, -0.10274510830640793, -0.08863583952188492, 0.04718506336212158, 0.06710191816091537, -0.0076684714294970036, -0.010017861612141132, -0.0043680258095264435, 0.08572520315647125, -0.011802224442362785, -0.08790850639343262, 0.07545999437570572, 0.047869548201560974, -0.026742570102214813, -0.06511115282773972, 0.017500927671790123, 0.024429596960544586, 0.11471246182918549, 0.047072719782590866, 0.047352369874715805, 0.02118278294801712, -0.05026322603225708, -0.06700801849365234, -0.056283362209796906, -2.1317039039185236e-32, -0.04083205759525299, -0.03438246250152588, -0.001327049802057445, 0.0213466864079237, -0.03736216947436333, 0.06152188777923584, -0.005363065283745527, -0.006707792170345783, 0.007536850869655609, 0.03897174075245857, 0.020695941522717476, -0.031242888420820236, -0.07505803555250168, -0.006722422316670418, -0.012944270856678486, 0.000984820886515081, -0.011329559609293938, 0.037766724824905396, -0.08578065782785416, 0.010064185597002506, -0.017061680555343628, -0.04380957782268524, -0.029971789568662643, -0.020415646955370903, 0.10431011021137238, -0.08749265223741531, -0.03208373486995697, 0.04624313488602638, 0.056758128106594086, -0.02480529062449932, 0.11740981787443161, 0.027867890894412994, -0.0392361618578434, 0.013642102479934692, -0.00832093320786953, 0.0020228270441293716, -0.10080091655254364, -0.057706717401742935, 0.0811414048075676, 0.04425433650612831, -0.06148192659020424, 0.0017251198878511786, 0.04467300325632095, 0.001544088707305491, 0.017063863575458527, 0.04343688488006592, -0.011850627139210701, -0.02393716387450695, -0.07176253199577332, -0.027270574122667313, -0.0810370072722435, -0.018779875710606575, -0.05362218990921974, -0.03246549889445305, -0.05167490988969803, -0.0018614779692143202, -0.024640003219246864, -0.018501685932278633, -0.09772676974534988, -0.00868106260895729, -0.061899807304143906, -0.03140714392066002, -0.09949984401464462, -0.05058661475777626, -0.0961260199546814, 0.08914469182491302, -0.030329713597893715, 0.029356176033616066, 0.028623150661587715, -0.05798361077904701, -0.09919442236423492, -0.033197835087776184, 0.01689264364540577, 0.013863113708794117, 0.019112994894385338, -0.024547023698687553, 0.01179985236376524, 0.05227157473564148, 0.052879054099321365, 0.01202215626835823, -0.021382829174399376, 0.016967544332146645, 0.01210260484367609, 0.03495137766003609, 0.01018491294234991, 0.03903746232390404, 0.03201832249760628, -0.10505956411361694, 0.06463616341352463, 0.030142921954393387, -0.020285984501242638, 0.001904984819702804, -0.03849007189273834, 0.021843060851097107, 0.04942307993769646, 8.721808087956434e-33, -0.05308794230222702, 0.013950699009001255, -0.08373461663722992, 0.03003508970141411, -0.0019510815618559718, -0.021532155573368073, -0.021405745297670364, -0.013758867979049683, 0.01830330118536949, -0.04602401703596115, 0.002606512513011694, 0.022053539752960205, -0.07362218201160431, 0.01241946779191494, -0.05894296243786812, -0.0007658099057152867, -0.011562131345272064, 0.01712873764336109, -0.013251435942947865, -0.041677724570035934, 0.006199241615831852, 0.07930075377225876, 0.052392564713954926, 0.047298505902290344, -0.05167173221707344, 0.020643725991249084, -0.11396991461515427, -0.026944439858198166, -0.06618025153875351, 0.053823985159397125, -0.06529872119426727, 0.03622860088944435, -0.015955505892634392, 0.10036708414554596, -0.0906621515750885, -0.05954262986779213, 0.053834740072488785, -0.10670500993728638, 0.011380517855286598, 0.02450341172516346, 0.1058008223772049, -0.01834787428379059, 0.04654505476355553, -0.05710897967219353, -0.0010292214574292302, -0.025980236008763313, 0.10409585386514664, -0.0764743760228157, 0.07185669243335724, -0.0002301358472323045, -0.0026521426625549793, 0.05031966790556908, -0.02250128611922264, 0.003105591982603073, -0.02956194244325161, 0.05678386613726616, 0.17771165072917938, -0.01962384767830372, -0.050555501133203506, 0.02849162183701992, 0.013085744343698025, 0.12035717070102692, -0.045187272131443024, 0.03295961767435074, -0.008189240470528603, -0.10070714354515076, 0.009475733153522015, -0.01761363446712494, 0.039187803864479065, -0.11349015682935715, 0.00013721169671043754, -0.10679014027118683, 0.02711721509695053, -0.019607163965702057, -0.061521973460912704, 0.033280257135629654, -0.0016158334910869598, -0.047775108367204666, 0.009377368725836277, 0.0032842722721397877, -0.06668322533369064, 0.04921635612845421, 0.003407126059755683, 0.048491351306438446, 0.009737980552017689, -0.019789597019553185, 0.04259809851646423, -0.10551836341619492, 0.014330332167446613, 0.007277517579495907, -0.12359091639518738, 0.035621415823698044, 0.0037670701276510954, -0.035770121961832047, -0.008633343502879143, -4.7103046796337367e-8, -0.04655381664633751, 0.0019159578951075673, -0.028370028361678123, 0.012394130229949951, -0.000012812348359148018, -0.03576449677348137, -0.059830307960510254, -0.04733695462346077, -0.045286085456609726, 0.07322792708873749, 0.06949923932552338, 0.013537748716771603, -0.14825858175754547, -0.011340312659740448, -0.06649279594421387, -0.06704102456569672, -0.04267580062150955, -0.000510767858941108, -0.04206050932407379, 0.015702497214078903, 0.04482347145676613, 0.03971599042415619, -0.02055569551885128, 0.01714358665049076, -0.03552212193608284, -0.025987135246396065, 0.026776252314448357, 0.056445807218551636, 0.020437737926840782, 0.03660873696208, 0.03573788329958916, 0.06958077102899551, 0.01714637316763401, -0.026452258229255676, -0.04274292662739754, 0.05966031178832054, 0.04143565893173218, 0.03909987583756447, -0.01902434416115284, 0.06739052385091782, 0.003977006766945124, -0.04236125200986862, -0.006514883134514093, 0.043297965079545975, 0.07137908786535263, 0.02777688391506672, -0.06825292110443115, -0.05419394373893738, 0.07041334360837936, -0.07685986906290054, -0.018363533541560173, -0.024422170594334602, 0.011567850597202778, 0.03835652768611908, 0.051951996982097626, -0.06158284470438957, -0.07399079203605652, 0.10872525721788406, -0.020384356379508972, -0.03627900779247284, 0.006315543316304684, -0.01085460465401411, -0.00024072300584521145, 0.010079612024128437 ]

{ "pdf_file": "G5C3CM7DIONQOEWTYFPP3UJEWODLVHPN.pdf", "text": "Safety and Soundness \nOffice of the\nComptr oller of the Curr ency\nWashington, DC 20219 Comptroller’s Handbook \nManagement \n(M)Earnings \n(E)Liquidity\n(L)Sensitivity to\nMarket Risk\n(S)Other\nActivities\n(O)Asset\nQuality\n(A)Capital\nAdequacy\n(C)\nA-SL\nStudent Lending \nMay 2016 \nComptroller’s Handbook i Student Lending Contents \n \nIntroduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 \nBackground ............................................................................................................................... 1 \nRegulatory Considerations .................................................................................................. 1 \nGeneral Information ............................................................................................................ 1 \nBusiness Model ................................................................................................................... 3 \nPrivate Student Loan Features ............................................................................................ 5 \nFederal Student Loans Versus Private Student Loans ........................................................ 6 \nRisks Associated With Private Student Lending ....................................................................... 8 \nCredit Risk .......................................................................................................................... 8 \nOperational Risk ................................................................................................................. 9 \nCompliance R isk ............................................................................................................... 10 \nLiquidity Risk ................................................................................................................... 12 \nStrategic Risk .................................................................................................................... 12 \nReputation Risk ................................................................................................................. 13 \nInterest Rate Risk .............................................................................................................. 13 \nRisk Management and Control Systems.................................................................................. 14 \nMarketing and Account Acquisition ................................................................................. 14 \nPrivate Student Lending Underwriting Standards ............................................................ 16 \nLoan Servicing and Administration .................................................................................. 25 \nCollections ........................................................................................................................ 28 Internal Audit .................................................................................................................... 31 \nRisk Rating and Examiner Guidance ...................................................................................... 31 \nClassification and Charge- Off Policies ............................................................................. 31 \nMIS for Collections .......................................................................................................... 32 \nWorkout Program and Debt Management ........................................................................ 33 \nConsolidation and Refinance ............................................................................................ 39 \nRecoveries ......................................................................................................................... 39 \nAllowance and Capital Treatment .................................................................................... 40 \nRehabilitated Federal Student Loans ................................................................................ 41 \n \nExamination Procedures .................................................................................................................... 43 \nScope ................................................................................................................................. 43 \nPrimary Examination Procedures ................................\n ..................................................... 45 \nSupplemental Examination Procedures ............................................................................ 53 \nConclusions ....................................................................................................................... 79 \nInternal Control Questionnaire ......................................................................................... 81 \nVerification Procedures .................................................................................................... 83 \n \nAppendixes .......................................................................................................................................... 85 \nAppendix A: Transaction Testing ..................................................................................... 85 \nAppendix B: Sample Request Letter ................................................................................. 89 \nAppendix C: Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy \nChecklist ..................................................................................................................... 94 \nAppendix D: Loss Forecasting Tool ................................................................................. 97 \nAppendix E: Glossary ..................................................................................................... 101 \nAppendix F: Abbreviations ............................................................................................. 110 \n References ......................................................................................................................................... 112 Introduction > Background \nComptroller’s Handbook 1 Student Lending Introduction \n \nBackground \n \nThe Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (OCC) Comptroller’s Handbook booklet, \n“Student Lending,” is prepared for use by OCC examiners in connection with their \nexamination and supervision of national banks and federal savings associations (collectively, banks). Each bank is different and may present specific issues. Accordi ngly, examiners \nshould apply the information in this booklet consistent with each bank’s individual circumstances. When it is necessary to distinguish between them, national banks and federal savings associations (FSA) are referred to separately. \n This booklet focuses on private student lending. Information regarding federal student loans is included as industry background, for historical context, and to highlight differences \nbetween federal student loans and private student loans. This booklet discusses how banks may legally and prudently engage in private student lending and the risks inherent in such \nlending; provides information on unique aspects of private student loans and industry practices ; and includes private student lending product information, the processes involved in \nlending and risk management functions, and regulatory expectations for safe and sound operations. The booklet provides additional notes on guaranteed rehabilitated student loans, a pool of loans that a small number of OCC-regulated community and midsize banks have shown \ninterest in and have added to their balance sheets. \n \nRegulatory Considerations \n The regulatory considerations for national banks and FSA s are discussed throughout this \nbooklet. One notable consideration for FSAs , which does not apply to national banks, is \nsection 5(c)(1)(U) of the Home Owners’ Loan Act .\n1 This statute allows FSA s to invest in, \nsell, or otherwise deal in loans and other investments made for the payment of educational expenses without any limit on the aggregate amount of such loans. \n \nGeneral Information \n The student lending market began with the passage of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA).\n2 This federal law governs the administration of federal student aid programs that \nprovide financial assistance to students in postsecondary and higher education. Title IV of the HEA, which covers “financial assistance for students,” authorized the federal guaranteed student loan program. The law was intended to strengthen the educational resources of colleges and universities and to provide financial assistance for students in postsecondary and \n \n1 Refer to 12 USC 1464(c)(1)(U), “Federal Savings Associations: Loans or Investments Without Percentage of \nAssets Limitation: Educational Loans,” and generally 12 USC 1461 et seq. \n \n2 Refer to Public Law 89 -329, 79 Stat 1219 (1965) (codified as 20 USC 1000 et seq.). Introduction > Background \nComptroller’s Handbook 2 Student Lending higher education. Among other things, the HEA increased federal money given to \nuniversities and awarded low-interest loans to students. Over the years, Congress has periodically reauthorized the HEA and has amended programs, changed the language and policies of existing programs, and established the statutory pricing of fe deral student loans. \n The following are some of the federal student loan programs that have been available to \nstudents and their parents to finance postsecondary education: \n• William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program (Direct Loan Program ):\n3 These loans \nare made by the U.S. Department of Education rather than by private financial \ninstitutions. The Direct Loan Program comprises four types of loans: Direct Subsidized \nStafford Loans,4 Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loans, Direct Parental Loans for \nUndergraduate Students (Direct PLUS Loans), and Direct Consolidation L oans \n(consolidation loans). These loans are direct obligations of the Education Department, are \nnot underwritten, and have not been securitized. \n• Federal Perkins Loan Program:5 These are low -interest, long- term loan s intended for \nundergraduate, graduate, and professional students with exceptional financial need. The \nfederal government subsidizes Perkins loans , meaning interest does not accrue until the \nloan enters repayment. In the Federal Perkins Loan Program , federal funds are delivered \nto the educational institution , which then becomes t he lender. The borrower makes \npayments to the educational institution or to the educational institution’s loan servicer . \n• Federal Family E ducation Loan P rogram (FFELP) :6 The passage of the Health Care \nand Education Reconciliati on Act of 2010 (HCERA) ended FFELP . While FFELP no \nlonger exists, banks that used to participat e in FFELP may still be managing a runoff7 \nportfolio. These were loans funded by private banks and guaranteed by the federal \ngovernment through the Education Department. Through FFELP, the federal government used to provide subsidies to private banks to offer federally insured loans that included subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford Loans, Direct PL US Loans, and consolidation \nloans. \n The federal government ’s role in financing postsecondary and higher education has grown \nsignificantly , and the government has now become the dominant source of financing . \n \n3 This is a student loan program authorized by Title IV, part C , of the HEA (20 USC 1087a et seq.). Refer to \n34 CFR 685.100. \n \n4 The interest on a Direct Subsidized Stafford Loan is paid for by the federal government while the student is in \nschool and during certain periods of deferment. \n \n5 This is a student loan progr am authorized by the HEA, Title IV, part D (20 USC 1087aa et seq.). Refer to \n34 CFR 673, “General Provisions for the Federal Perkins Loan Program, Federal Work -Study Program, and \nFederal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant Program.” Also refer to 34 CFR 674, “Federal Perkins \nLoan Program.” \n \n6 This is a student loan program formerly authorized by Title IV, part B, of the HEA (20 USC 1071 et seq.). \nRefer to 34 CFR 682, “Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program.” \n \n7 The term “runoff” is defined as reduction of a loan portfolio as loans are paid off at scheduled maturity dates \nwhile no new business is being booked. Introduction > Background \nComptroller’s Handbook 3 Student Lending Alternative loans or private student l oans are lo ans offered through lending programs funded \nby private lending institutions. By offering private student loans, banks generally provide a \nsupplement to the federal government in financing postsecondary and higher education , e.g. , \nwhen the maximum federal student loan available to a student is less than the cost of \nattending a school. \nBusiness Model \n Private student loans are consumer loans offered to borrowers to fund undergraduate, graduate, and other forms of postsecondary education. Under Regulation Z (12 CFR 1026.46(b)(5)), a private education loan means an extension of credit that \n \n• is not made, insured, or guaranteed under Title IV of the H EA (20 USC 1070 et seq.). \n• is extended to a consumer expressly, in whole or in part, for postsecondary educational \nexpenses, regardless of whether the loan is provided by the educational institution that the \nstudent attends. \n• does not include open- end credit or any loan that is secured by real property or a \ndwelling . \n• does not include an extension of credit in which the covered educational institution is the \ncreditor if \n– the term of the extension of credit is 90 days or less; or \n– an interest rate will not be applied to the credit balance and the term of the extension \nof credit is one year or less, even if the credit is payable in more than four \ninstallments. \n Before the financial crisis began in 2008 and before FFELP was discontinued, some lenders \noperated on an integrated business model that included both federal guaranteed and private student loans. Banks he ld legal title to FFELP loans and receive d claim payments from \neligible guarantors if eligible borrower s defaulted . FFELP loans generated income for banks \nin the form of interest income, interest subsidy payments ,\n8 default reimbursement, and \nspecial a llowance payment s.9 Interest subsidy payments were paid while the students were in \nschool, during the grace period, and during certain periods of deferment. FFELP loans received a 97 percent to 100 percent guarantee of principal and accrued inter est, with \nreimbursement contingent on following the Education Department ’s servicing guidelines and \ndue diligence requirement s.\n10 \n \n \n8 Interest subsidy payments are in- school interest payments on certain subsidized student loans paid for by the \nEducation Department. \n \n9 Special allowance payments were subsidies from the Education Department to FFELP lenders to ensure that \nlenders received a minimum rate of return. Special allowance payments acted as an incentive for lenders to \nmake education loans by, in effect, making up the difference between the interest rate charged to a FFELP \nborrower and market interest rates. \n \n10 Refer to Common Manual: Unified Student Loan Policy, chapters 10 and 12. This resource is a cooperative \neffort of all the nation’s guarantors that participa te in FFELP. Introduction > Background \nComptroller’s Handbook 4 Student Lending The financial crisis altered the banking landscape dramatically, resulting in fewer bank \nparticipants in post secondary education lending and changes in banks’ strategies. Banks had \nto reassess the long -term risk and return aspects of the private student loan business and \nmake conscious decisions regarding the level and extent of their involvement in postsecondary education lending. S everal large banks either withdrew or scaled back their \nprivate student loan offerings. Community banks, too, have been affected , and in many cases \nfound it difficult to compete with the product array and pricing offered by larger institutions \nand the federal government. There are very few banks still engaged in private student lending, and those banks generally keep their portfolio exposures to a minimum. Today, the \noverall size of the private student loan portfolio is considered small compared with the \noverall size of the federal student loan portfolio. A small number of community banks, however, found an emerging opportunity in the federal guaranteed rehabilitated student loan \nprogram.\n11 \n The disruption in the securitization market during the financial crisis forced banks to alter their strategies. Banks that were originating and selling both FFELP and private student loans as asset -backed securities in the secondary market were forced to keep them in bank \nportfolios. Most significantly, when the HCERA eliminated FFELP , the role of banks in federal student \nlending was discontinued for new loans. On July 1, 2010, the D irect Loan P rogram replaced \nFFELP\n12 and it has been the only source of new federal student loans since then . These loans \nare obtained through the educational in stitution’s financial aid office with funds provided by \nthe Education Department. The terms and features of the federal student loans under the Direct Loan Program are similar to the terms and features of the federal stud ent loans \npreviously available through FFELP. \n Although FFELP has been eliminated, banks continue to own and service loans made under FFELP. Because of their long repayment terms (120 to 360 months), runoff FFELP loans \nremain in the banks ’ portfolio s. It is not unusual for examiners to find banks with both \nprivate student loan and federal guaranteed student loan exposures on their balance sheet s. \n Private student loans supplement federal student loans when federal student loans and other financial aid are not sufficient to cover the entire cost of education. Borrowers attending high-cost institutions or pursuing advanced degrees may turn to private student loan \nprograms for additional financing. Banks should strongly encourage their borrowers to exhaust sch olarships, grants, other financial aid, and federal student loans before applying for \nprivate student loan s. \n Student loan growth is not normally tied to the same fact ors that drive consumer lending, \nsuch as economic cyclicality, housing prices, and disposable income. In fact, student lending \n \n11 Refer to the “Rehabilitated Federal Student Loans” section of this booklet for a discussion of the Federal \nRehabilitation Student Loan Program. \n \n12 FFELP’s elimination only prohibited the making of new FFELP loans. If the first disbursement of a FFELP \nloan occurred before July 1, 2010, further disbursements of that loan could continue under FFELP. Introduction > Background \nComptroller’s Handbook 5 Student Lending exhibits some counter-cyclicality. A poor job market often encourages student borrowing \nbecause securing a college degree can improve job prospects. S ome s tudents may stay in \nschool to avoid competing in a poor job market. There is heightened public awareness and public policy attention centered on all participants in student lending. Banks should be mindful of the unique aspects of student lending, such as the significant time lag between loan advances and repayment , and the student borrower ’s \nlack of certainty in finding a stable, reliable primary source of repayment after graduation . \nBanks should pursue student lending in a measured and deliberate way. If managed and administered in an appropriate manner, student lending could benefit banks by providing \nthem with a wider array of consumer products and a more diverse business model, and \nhelping them reach new customers. \n \nPrivate Student Loan Features \n Most retail loan products are straightforward in terms of underwriting, loan structure, and account management. The use of funds is for a specific purpose, and the source of repayment \nis well-defined, well -structured, and typically verified as reliable at origination. Private \nstudent loans are less straightforward and require lenders to adapt loan structures and repayment terms to product characteristics. \n Private student loans fund postsecondary education, are geared to the educational purpose of the loans and borrower needs, and require a substantial, long- term commitment. These loans \nlack collateral, and there is a significant time lag between loan advances and stable, reliable primary sources of repayment. This last factor is particularly important and often leads to \ndifferences in underwriting, loan repayment structures , and borrower assistance during \nrepayment. P rivate student loans generally are not dischargeable in bankruptcy.\n13 \n Student loan repayment structures (federal and private) generally provide in-school \ndeferment and post- school grace periods that help borrowers transition from in-school status \nto full- time employment. Student loans generally are the only consumer product with such a \ntransition. \n Banks that offer private student loans generally require borrower enrollment in degree-seeking program s. Private student loan features vary by target market and finance different \neducation programs, including undergraduate, law, and business; medical, dental , and other \nhealth -related education ; and general graduate studies, parent loans for students pursuing \nthese programs , and loans to borrowers attending career schools and community colleges. \nBanks offer private student loans to specifically cover costs of medical boards and clinical \nexams, medical residency interview and relocation, internships, and costs associated with studying for a bar exam for law graduates . Some banks offer consolidation loans to simplify \nand streamline borrower repayment into a single payment and billing due date. \n \n13 Refer to 11 USC 523(a)(8), “Exceptions to Discharge.” Private student loans generally are not dischargeable \nin bankruptcy if they are originated f or borrowers attending schools eligible to participate in federal student loan \nprograms. Private student loans extended to students in programs without access to federal funding (i.e., certain \ntrade schools) may be dischargeable in bankruptcy. Introduction > Background \nComptroller’s Handbook 6 Student Lending Examiners should consider whether banks are appropriately setting the product requirements , \nterm, pricing, and loan limits , and whether these features meet borrower needs and \ncircumstances. Additionally, policies and procedures should provide adequate guidance to \nensure that loans offered to borrowers are consistent with their needs, objectives, and \nfinancial conditions. \nFederal Student Loans Versus Private Student Loans \n Examiners should consider the unique aspects of student loans and understand that there are significant differences and relative similarities between federal student loan programs (FFELP and Direct Loan) and private student loans . \n \nDifferences \n \n• Loss guaran tees: FFELP loans received loss guarantees of 97 percent to 100 percent \ndepending on origination dates. FFELP loans originated before October 1993 received a \n100 percent guarantee; loans originated between October 1993 and June 2006 received a \n98 percent guarantee; and loans originated on or after July 1, 2006, received a 97 percent \nguarantee. In contrast, private student loans do not carry a ny such federal government \nguarantee. To mitigate private student loan losses, some banks purchased loan loss \ninsurance from third-party insurers. The disruption in the insurance market in 2008 ended this practice. \n• Application : A borrower must complete and file t he Free Application for Federal \nStudent Aid (FAFSA) form with the educational institution ’s financial aid office to apply \nfor a federal student loan. No FAFSA form is required to apply for a private student loan. \n• Pricing and loan amount: Interest rates and loan borrowing limits on federal student \nloans are set by statute for all eligible borrowers under a particular loan program.\n14 \nPrivate student loan interest rates and loan amounts are risk -based. \n• Criteria : The borrower eligibility criteria for federal stu dent loans allow most borrowers \nto qualify. Federal eligibility criteria rely on federal needs analysis methodology and do \nnot, in most cases, employ credit checks, with the exception of PLUS loans.15 Private \nstudent loans are underwritten based on a set of risk -based , lender -developed credit \ncriteria that consider the borrower’s credit history and ability to repay, and often require a \ncosigner(s). \n \n14 20 USC 1087e(b)(8) , “Terms and Conditions of Loans: Interest Rate Provisions for New Loans On or After \nJuly 1, 2013,” establishes t he current interest rates for d irect loans. 20 USC 1077a , “Applicable Interest Rates ,” \nestablished m aximum interest rates for federal guaranteed loans made under FFELP, including Direct PLUS \nLoans. \n \n15 Under 20 USC 1087kk et seq., the term “needs analysis” is defined as a standardized assessment of a \nstudent’s or a student’s family’s ability to contribute toward educational expenses . Introduction > Background \nComptroller’s Handbook 7 Student Lending • Default : The Education Department defines a default on a federal student loan as \noccur ring after 270 days of nonpayment.16 A private student loan is in default after \n120 days of nonpayment.17 \n• Workout p rogram : Any workout program offered by banks to financially distressed \nprivate borrowers should follow existing banking guidance, and adhere to generally \naccepted accou nting principles (GAAP) in determining if the loan constitutes a troubled \ndebt restructuring (TDR) . Federal student loan statutes do not have the same \nrequirements. \n• Collection tools: \n– A lawsuit is the main tool available to banks to pursue collection of defaulted private \nstudent loans. In contrast , defaulted federal student loans can be pursued using \nadditional tools outside of court, including seizure of tax refunds, garnishment of wages without a court order, denial of other financial student aid and grants, taking a portion of Social Security benefits received , and revocation of professional or \nvocational licenses. \n– Depending on the state, banks may have to consider the applicable statute of \nlimitation s to enforce private student loan court judgments. Some states allow banks \nto continuously renew the judgments to prevent them from being subjected to statute of limitation s. In comparison, there are no statutes of limitation s for collection on \nfederal student loans.\n18 \n \nSimilarities \n \n• Academic year basis: Both federal and private student loan programs generally grant or \nseparately approve loan s for each academic year.19 \n• In-school deferment and grace period : Both federal and private student loan programs \ngenerally allow the deferment of payments while borrowers are attending school at least \n \n16 For federal student loans, default is the failure of a borrower (or endorser or co -maker, if any) to make \ninstallment payments when due, if this failure persists for the most recent period of 270 days (for a loan \nrepayable in monthly installments) or the most recent 330 -day period (for a loan repayable in less frequent \ninstallments). Refer to Common Manual: Unified Student Loan Policy, “Appendix G: Glossary.” \n \n17 Refer to OCC Bulletin 2000 -20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Pol icy: \nPolicy Implementation.” \n \n18 Section 484A(a) of the HEA provides that no statute of limitations bars enforcement action to collect federal \nstudent loans, including collection by offset, lawsuit, or enforcement on student loan judgments. 20 USC 1091a(a), “Statute of Limitations, and State Court Judgments,” states that state law that would \notherwise limit these actions is superseded by federal law and cannot bar collection action. \n \n19 The Education Department uses the academic year for determining a borrower’s Title IV aid eligibility. The \nterm “academic year” is defined as a period during which an undergraduate, full -time student is expected to \ncomplete either of the following: (1) at least 30 weeks of instructional time and 24 semester or trimester hours, \nor 36 quarter hours in an educational program that measures program length in credit hours, or (2) at least 26 \nweeks of instructional time and 900 clock hours in an educational program that measures program length in \nclock hours. Refer to Common Manual: Unified Student Loan Policy, “Appendix G: Glossary.” Introduction > Risks Associated With Private Student Lending \nComptroller’s Handbook 8 Student Lending • half time. Both types of programs generally provide for a six- month grace period after \ngraduation or separation from school before repayment begins. \n• Bankruptcy : Both private and federal student loans generally are no t dischargeable in \nbankruptcy unless borrowers can establish that repaying the loan s would cause “undue \nhardship.”20 \n \nRisk s Associated With Private Student Lending \n \nFrom a supervisory perspective, risk is the potential that events will have an adverse effect on a bank’s current or projected financial condition\n21 and resilience.22 The OCC has defined \neight categories of risk for bank supervision purposes: credit, interest rate, liquidity, price, operational, compliance, strategic, and reputation. These categories are not mutually exclusive. Any product or service may expose a bank to multiple risks. Risks also may be \ninterdependent and may be positively or negati vely correlated. Examiners should be aware of \nthis interdependence and assess the effect in a consistent and inclusive manner. Examiners also should be alert to concentrations that can significantly elevate risk. Concentrations can accumulate within and ac ross products, business lines, geographic areas, countries, and legal \nentities. Refer to the “Bank Supervision Process” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook for \nan expanded discussion of banking risks and their definitions. \n The risks associated with private student lending are credit, operational, compliance, \nliquidity, strategic, reputation, and interest rate. \nCredit Risk \n \nCredit risk is the most significant risk in private student lending. Private student loans are atypical of consumer loans because banks generally rely on the student borrower’s \nprospective ability to repay. Private student loans finance a postsecondary education that often requires a considerable loan amount and a long-term bank commitment. These loans lack collateral , and there usuall y is a significant time lag between loan advances and the start \nof repayment. Borrowers are expected to graduate and generate a stable, reliable primary source of repayment, but whether they will actually do so is uncertain . Banks take on the \ncredit risk based on reasonable assumptions of the borrower’s and cosigner’s ability to repay. \nBanks engaged in private student lending not only rely on traditional consumer lending \ncriteria but also consider school eligibility criteria , such as program completion , graduation \n \n \n20 Refer to 11 USC 523(a)(8), “Exceptions to Discharge.” \n \n21 Financial condition includes impacts from diminished capital and liquidity. Capital in this context includes \npotential impacts from losses, reduced earnings, and market value of equity. \n \n22 Resilience recognizes the bank’s ability to withstand periods of stress. Introduction > Risks Associated With Private Student Lending \nComptroller’s Handbook 9 Student Lending rates , and the cost of attendance.23 Without considering school eligibility factors, banks could \nbe exposed to higher credit risk. \n Consumer attitudes toward debt, affordability of higher education, underwriting standards, federal education policy, government public interests, and risk layering all can affect credit risk in private student loans. The effects of these factors are more pronounced for banks that lend to higher-risk borrowers with limited credit history and no direct source of repayment. In addition, private student loans can have elevated credit risk due to their variable rate feature and extended repayment terms. An unreasonable repayment period without consideration of the loan size may contribute to credit risk. Borrowers and cosigners who use \ndefer ment to delay loan repayment could pose increased credit risk to the bank. While in \ndeferment, the loan amount continues to increase because of capitalized interest and may \nmean higher cost to borrowers. Concentration risk is relate d to and affects credit risk. Concentration risk in private student \nlending can result from originating a large volume of loans to a specific class of borrowers, product type, and educational institution , or to borrowers affected by common economic \nevents. Credit risk exists throughout the lending cycles of private student loans . These cycles \ninclude acquisition, initial underwriting, account management, and collection. Similar to other consumer loans, private student lending involves grouping homogeneous loans when credit risk is evaluated and managed on a segment or pooled basis. Credit risk can be reduced in several ways. B anks should have a rigorous process of \nassessing their risk appetite, establishing product concentration limits measured as a percentage of capital, and charting forward -looking business strateg ies. Banks can control \ntheir credit risks by having strong credit risk management proces ses to guard against the \nunexpected and to measure, monitor, and control risks. Banks should have clearly documented and updated policies and procedures, underwriting standards, effective collection programs, and good management information systems (MIS). Examiners assess credit risk in private student lending by evaluating portfolio performance, profitability , borrower profiles, products, and markets. Examiners should consider changes in \nunderwriting standards, account acquisition channels, the credit score system used by the bank, and its marketing strategy. \n \nOperational Risk \n Similar to other retail loan products, student loan credit operations are primarily process-based and rely extensively on technology and automation along with ongoing innovation. For \nexample, most banks have an application processing system (auto- decision system) that is \n \n23 The cost of attendance (COA) is an estimate of the student’s ed ucational expenses for the period of \nenrollment. The COA estimate should include tuition and fees, room and board, books and supplies, \ntransportation, and personal expenses. COA is used solely for determining financial aid. The COA should \ninclude only thos e costs already incurred, or expected to be incurred, by the student over the course of the loan \nperiod. COA may not include outstanding charges or fees from a previous period of enrollment. Introduction > Risks Associated With Private Student Lending \nComptroller’s Handbook 10 Student Lending programm ed to streamline the student loan decision process. The process system atically \napproves applicants who meet preapproved requirements. Banks employ credit scoring24 \ntechnology. Because the operations tend to be so highly automated, banks should manage the \nprocesses prudently and maintain the systems and controls necessary to effectively identify, measure, monitor, and control operational risk. \n Almost all banks engaged in student lending use third parties to perform various operational functions, such as loan acquisition and origination, servicing, and collections. Increased due diligence is required in these situations to minimize operational risk. Outsourcing specific activities may provide enhanced profitability; the risk , however, remains with the banks. \nOCC Bu lletin 2013-29, “ Third -Party Relationships: Risk Management Guidance, ” sets forth \nsupervisory expectations in this area for banks. \n Fraud is another operational risk present in private student lending. Banks should guard \nagainst private student loan fraud by verifying that funds are used to pay borrowers ’ tuition \nand other education expenses. Operating through the school channel versus a direct- to-\nconsumer channel allows for such verification. Examiners assess operational risk by evaluating the adequacy of private student loan application, processing, loan servicing, and collections systems and controls. Examiners \nshould consider the volume of accounts managed, the capabilities of systems and technologies in relation to current and prospective volume, contingency preparedness, and \nexposures throughout the servicing system. \nCompliance Risk \n A significant number of consumer-related laws and regulations affect private student lending and make this type of lending vulnerable to compliance risk. The origination and collection of private student loans are subject to f ederal and state consumer protection laws and \nregulations. B anks’ failure to comply with such laws and regulations could result in the \nassessment of fees, penalties, and adverse ratings. The following is a list of some of the \nconsumer- related laws and regulations\n25 applicable to private student lending: \n \n• The Truth in Lending Act of 1968 (TILA), as implemented by Regulation Z \n(12 CFR 1026), and amended by the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008, which \n \n24 Credit scorecards provide an objective, numerical measure of a borrower’s creditworthiness based on \nstatistical models that evaluate performance and other factors. Credit scorecards, also referred to as models, are \nrisk-ranking tools that attempt to differentiate between accounts that will exhibit “good” behavior and those that \nwill not. (The definition of “bad” accounts varies but typically involves some level of delinquency, usually 60+ or 90+ days past due.) The scores generated indicate the relative level of risk in either ascending or descending order, depending on the convention used by the model developer. Credit scoring also is used to control risk in acquisition and underwriting, account management, and collection processes. \n \n25 Other Comptroller’s Handbook booklets in the Consumer Compliance series address thes e laws and \nregulations more fully. For each of these laws and regulations, refer to the relevant booklet, which includes updated information and complete examination procedures. Introduction > Risks Associated With Private Student Lending \nComptroller’s Handbook 11 Student Lending added disclosure, timing , and other requirements for lenders making private education \nloans.26 Regulation Z contains rules on disclosures, limitations on changes in terms after \napproval, the right to cancel the loan, and limitations on co-branding27 in the marketing \nof private education loans (12 CFR 1026.46 to 12 CFR 1026.48). \n• The Electronic Fund Transfer Act of 1978 (EFTA) , as implemented by Regulation E \n(12 CFR 1005), which governs electron ic fund transfers, such as telephone bill payments \nfrom borrowers and remote banking programs.28 \n• The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act of 1977 (FDCPA) and as subsequently amended , \nwhich is designed to eliminate certain abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection \npractices by debt collectors (generally those who regularly collect, or attempt to collect, consumer debts for another person or institution, or use a name other than their own when \ncollecting their consumer debts).\n29 \n• The Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970 (FCRA) , as implemented by Regulation V \n(12 CFR 1022), which, among other requirements, imposes duties on furnishers of \ninformation to consumer reporting agencies.30 \n• The Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974 (ECOA), as implemented by Regulation B \n(12 CFR 1002), which prohibits discrimination in any aspect of a credit transaction and \nrequire s banks to provide adverse action notices to consumers.31 \n• The Gramm –Leach –Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA) , as implemented by Regulation P \n(12 CFR 1016), which requires banks to provide privacy notices and limit information \nsharing in specific ways .32 \n• Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and sections 1031 and 1036 of the \nDodd–Frank Wall Street and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, which together prohibit \nunfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in banks’ interactions with consumers.33 \n• The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act of 2003 (SCRA ), which, among other relief \nprovisions for servicemembers, requires creditors to reduce the interest rate on debt \n \n26 Refer to 15 USC 1638(e), “Transactions Other Than Under an Open End Credit P lan: Terms and Disclosure \nWith Respect to Private Education Loans.” Also refer to 15 USC 1650, “Preventing Unfair and Deceptive \nPrivate Educational Lending Practices and Eliminating Conflicts of Interest.” TILA appears at 15 USC 1601 et seq. \n \n27 Refer to 12 CFR 1026.48, “Limitations on Private Student Loans.” \n \n28 Refer to 15 USC 1693 et seq. \n \n29 Refer to 15 USC 1692 et seq. \n \n30 Refer to 15 USC 1681 et seq. \n \n31 Refer to 15 USC 1691 et seq. \n \n32 Refer to 15 USC 6801 et seq. \n \n33 Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act is codified at 15 USC 45, and sections 1031 and 1036 of \nDodd– Frank are codified at 12 USC 5531 and 5536, respectively. Introduction > Risks Associated With Private Student Lending \nComptroller’s Handbook 12 Student Lending incurred before entry into military service to no more than 6 percent upon receipt of a \nwritten request and a copy of military orders .34 \n• The Military Lending Act of 2006 (MLA) , which applies to all student loans not \nexcluded from TILA. The rule expands specific protections provided to servicemembers \nand their families under the MLA and addresses a wider range of credit products than the U.S. Department of Defense’ s previous regulation.\n35 \n Bank management should assess whether staff and third parties involved in marketing, loan \nprocessing, servicing, and collections activity comply fully with these laws and regulations. Equally important, examiners should be familiar with applicable laws and regulations that affect private student lending. \nLiquidit y Risk \n Banks engaged in private student lending generally fund their portfolios either through asset -\nbacked securitization or by lever aging the banks’ deposit base, or a combination of the two . \nBanks are exposed to liquidity risk when student loans are not in active repayment. Most \nprivate student loan programs allow students who are in school or in grace, deferment, or \nforbearance periods to defer payment of principal or interest or both. These loans not in \nactive re payment status do not generate cash f low. The time lag for loans in deferment and \nforbearance presents additional liquidity risk to banks in the form of increased durations of loans and possible increased default frequency. \nFor banks with off- balance- sheet private student loan exposures, interest and principal on \nbonds backed by such collateral may still be due during periods of reduced cash flow. To \navoid shortfalls in available funds to make such payments, banks often include capitalized interest accounts to cover the amount of reduced cash flow expected on the specific portfolio. Liquidity risk is present if banks securitize their private student loan portfolios. Underwriting \nstandards and administrative policies and procedures may not meet market requirements or expectations. Such an event may increase costs or limit access to funding markets in the future. Portfolio composition and portfolio volatility affect the salability of portfolios to \ninvestors and for securitization. Examiners should refer to the “Asset Securitization” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook for more information on securitization and on how to \nexamine these activities. \n \nStrategic Risk \n Banks offer ing private student loans should understand and evaluate competition, market \nconditions, borrower behavior, and economic, regulatory, and environmental factors that affect the industry. When making any changes to strategic direction, such as offering new \n \n34 Refer to 50 USC 3901 et seq. \n \n35 Refer to 32 CFR 232, “Limitation s on Terms of Consumer Credit Extended to Service Members and \nDependents.” Introduction > Risks Associated With Private Student Lending \nComptroller’s Handbook 13 Student Lending student loan products, altering pricing strategies, expanding product features, or encouraging \ngrowth, banks should consider relevant factors. B anks’ decision to enter, exit, or otherwise \nchange their participation in the market should have a sound basis rooted in thorough \nevaluation of a ll available information and due diligence.36 Banks should realistically assess \nthe risk involved in such decisions and evaluate whether these decisions are consistent with their management expertise, operating capacity , and resources, and align with their risk \nappetite and capital adequacy. The failure to properly assess these factors may expose bank s \nto unnecessary and unanticipated strategic risk and financial loss. \nReputation Risk \n Customer dissatisfaction due to operational breakdowns, general weaknes ses in any aspect of \nthe private student lending program, and inadequate policies and procedures can harm bank s’ \nreputation. Reputation risk can escalate if borrowers perceive that lending practices are unfair, deceptive, abusive, or predatory. Delegation of bank functions to third parties heightens reputation risk. Technological and news media developments have made reputation risk more consequent ial \nthan ever before for banks engaged in private student lending. Poor servicing of existing accounts or non- resolution of borrower issues can generate immediate headlines and negative \npublicity for banks. The 2008 financial crisis brought attention to the large amount of overall student debt (both federal and private). For many higher education stakeholders, it has been difficult to differentiate between bank and nonbank private student loan lenders . During the \neconomic downturn, high unemployment along with increased student loan default (federal \nand private) exposed banks to negative headlines concerning private student loans . Private \nstudent loan portfolios may be small in scale and not mater ial to the banks’ overall business, \nbut the reputation risk could be significant. Appropriate systems and controls to identify, measure, monitor, and control reputation risk are critical to a bank’s risk management . \n \nInterest Rate Risk \n Most private student loans have a variable rate feature that is sensitive to yield curve risk. \nAny shifts in the yield curve or flattening of the yield curv e can have an adverse impact on \nthe portfolio. Deferring payments while borrowers are in school at least half time is a \ncommon practice in private student lending. This unique characteristic of private student lending could make banks vulnerable to additio nal interest rate risk because of timing of cash \nflows and changes in both cash flow and earnings spread. \n \n36 Refer to OCC Bulletin 2004 -20, “Risk Management of New, Expanded, or Modified Bank Products and \nServices: Risk Management Process.” For FSAs, refer to OTS Examination Handbook , section 760. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 14 Student Lending Risk Management and Control Systems \n \nEach bank should identify, measure, monitor, and control risk by implementing an effective \nrisk management system appropriate for the size and complexity of its operations. When examiners assess the effectiveness of a bank’s risk management system, they consider the \nbank’s policies, processes, personnel, and control systems. Refer to the “Bank Supervision \nProcess” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook for an expanded discussion of risk \nmanagement. \n \nMarketing and Account Acquisition \n \nPrivate student loan originations may re ly on multiple marketing channels. These channels \nmay include bank branches, direct mail, school referral, and online or Internet sourcing. For the school referral channel, banks may employ sales forces that e stablish relationships \nwith school financial aid offices as preferred lender s.\n37 Banks target students at schools with \napplications generally submitted online. Banks use direct -to-consumer marketing and online \nchannel s to target borrower s and reach broader footprints. The most common method of \napplication is through secure w ebsite s operated directly by bank s or third parties . Banks use \ndirect mail and sales staff focused on targeted schools. \n Before the financial crisis, contractual relationship s existed between banks and guaranty \nagencies that originate d (underwrote), guara nteed, disbursed, and serviced private student \nloans on behalf of banks . Very few of these relationships survived the financial crisis . \n Whatever channels banks employ to originate private student loan s, banks should have the \nsystems to monitor the performance of those cha nnels and control any risks. F ailure to \nimplement strong control environments can lead to such problems as fraud, compliance \nissues, or a host of situations with unexpected consequences. \nBanks that origi nate private student loans are bound by TILA requirements. The general rules \napplicable to the special disclosure requirements for private education loans are detailed in \n \n37 The Higher Education Opportunity Act defines a “preferred lender arrangement” as an arrangement or \nagreement between a creditor and a school under which the creditor provides loans to the school’s students or \ntheir families, and the school recommends, promotes, or endorses the creditor’s loans. The term “preferred \nlender arrangement” is defined in 20 USC 1019(8), “Preferred Lender Arrangement.” 15 USC 1650(a)(5), “Preventing Unfair and Deceptive Private Educational Lending Practices and Eliminat ing Conflicts of Interest,” \ncontains a cross -reference to 20 USC 1019(8). The term is also discussed in 20 USC 1019a, “Responsibilities of \nCovered Institutions, Institution -Affiliated Organizations, and Lenders”; 20 USC 1019b, “Loan Information to \nBe Discl osed and Model Disclosure Form for Covered Institutions, Institution- Affiliated Organizations, and \nLenders Participating in Preferred Lender Arrangements”; 20 USC 1094, “Program Participation Agreements” ; \nand 15 USC 1638, “Transactions Other Than Under an Open End Credit Plan .” Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 15 Student Lending 12 CFR 1026.46 and associated commentary. Banks must comply with Regulation Z \nrequi rements , which includ e the following: \n \n• Disclosure r equirements :38 \n– Provide disclosures on or with applications or solicitations (12 CFR 1026.47(a) ). \n– Provide disclosures on or with a notice of loan approval (12 CFR 1026.47(b)). \n– Provide disclosures before loan disbursement (12 CFR 1026.47(c)). \n• Limitations on private education loans: \n– Prohibit co-branding in the marketing of private education loans \n(12 CFR 1026.48(a)), unless an arrangement is entered into by the creditor and school \nfor its endorsement and the marketing includes the proper disclosures (12 CFR 1026.48(b)). \n– Provide 30 calendar days to accept the loan consistent with the borrower ’s right to \naccept loan terms (12 CFR 1026.48(c)). \n– Provide a three -day right to cancel after receipt of final disclosures \n(12 CFR 1026.48(d)). \n– Obtain self-certification from the borrower before loan consummation \n(12 CFR 1026.48(e)). \n– Require banks in preferred lender arrangements to provide certain information to the school for each type of private student loan that the bank offers (12 CFR 1026.48(f)). \n Banks must comply with the rules and requirements in section 140 of TILA (15 USC 1650) \nthat address the following: \n \n• Prohibit any private educational lender from offering or providing any gift to a covered \neducati onal institution in exchange for any advantage related to the private educational \nlender’s private education loan activities . \n• Prohibit any private educational lender from directly or indirectly engaging in revenue sharing\n39 with a covered educational institution. \n• Prohibit co-branding , which means that a private educational lender may not use words, \npictures, or symbols readily identified with the covered educational institution in the \nmarketing of private education loans in any way that implies that the covered educational institution endorses the private education loans offered b y the private educational lender. \n• Prohibit a ny financial aid office employee, or other person who is employed in the \nfinancial aid office of a cover ed educational institution, or who otherwise has \nresponsibilities with respect to private education loans or other financial aid of the institution, and who serves on an advisory board, commission, or group established by a private educational lender or group of such lenders, from receiving anything of value \n \n38 Model forms for these disclosures are available in Regulation Z’s appendix H (pages H18 –H23). \n \n39 The term “revenue sharing” is defined as “an arrangement between a covered educational institution and a \nprivate educational lender un der which —(A) a private educational lender provides or issues private education \nloans with respect to students attending the covered educational institution; (B) the covered educational \ninstitution recommends to students or others the private educational lender or the private education loans of the private educational lender; and (C) the private educational lender pays a fee or provides other material benefits, \nincluding profit sharing, to the covered educational institution in connection with the private e ducation loans \nprovided to students attending the covered educational institution or a borrower acting on behalf of a student.” Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 16 Student Lending from the lender or group (other than reimbursement of reasonable expenses incurred as \npart of service on an advisory board, commission, or group). \n• Prohibit prepayment or repayment fees or penalt ies. \n• Require public disclosure of any contract or other agreement made between an institution \nof higher education and a card issuer or creditor for the purpose of marketing a credit card. \n To manage risk, bank management should ensure that all private student lend ing origination \nand marketing activities have the appropriate oversight, provide necessary disclosures, and comply with applicable rules and regulations. When pursuing school preferred lender relationship s, banks should make certain that all sales representatives follow appropriate \ncodes of conduct and ethics that include compliance with the requirements of Regulation Z and section 140 of TILA . \n Examiners should assess whether banks engaged in private student lending provide clear and \nconspicuous disclosures that contain the information required in 12 CFR 1026.47. This \ninformation includes topics such as applicable interest rates, fees, default and late payment costs, repayment terms, cost estimates, eligibility requirements, federal program alternatives to private student loans, the borrow er’s right to loan terms that remain generally unchanged \nfor 30 days, and the prerequisite borrower self- certification requirement.\n40 Banks must \nprovide this information to borrow ers and adequately address what borrowers need to know \nbefore obtaining private student loan s. In addition, banks must comply with approval \ndisclosure requirements as well as final disclosure requirements under section 12 CFR 1026.47. \n Banks that use third parties to market, solicit, or originate private student loans should have \nthird -party risk management frameworks that include \n \n• due diligence in selecting third partie s. \n• written contracts that have been thoroughly vetted for duties, obligations, and \nresponsibilities of all parties including compensation parameters . \n• ongoing monitoring and quality assurance programs. \n \nBanks should adhere to other regulatory expectations regarding risk management outlined in \nOCC Bulletin 2013-29, “ Third -Party Relationships: Risk Management Guidance.” B anks’ \nrisk management system s should reflect the complexity of third- party activities and the \noverall level of risk involved. \nPrivate Student Lending Underwriting Standards \n Banks’ risk appetite , or the level of risk they are willing to take , is the basis of the banks’ \nspecific underwriting criteria. Higher education financing may be the only consumer product \nfor which lenders generally consider cosigners ’ current ability to repay the loan s rather than \n \n40 This list consists of the required preapproval disclosures in 12 CFR 1026.47(a), “ Application or Solicitation \nDisclosures .” The contents of the approval disclosures and the disbursement disclosures are different. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 17 Student Lending the borrowers’ future income . Despite their unique purpose and nature, private student loans \nare unsecured retail credit products, and banks should adhere to safe and sound credit \nunderwriting and documentation standards as stated in 12 CFR 30, appendix A , “Safety and \nSoundness Standards,” that include the following : \n Prudent credit underwriting practices that \n \n• are commensurate with the types of loans banks will make and that consider the terms \nand conditions under which the loans will be made . \n• consider the nature of the markets in which loans will be made. \n• provide for consideration, before credit commitment, of borrowers ’ overall financial \ncondition and resources, the financial responsibility of any guarantors, the nature and \nvalue of any underly ing collateral, and borrowers ’ character and willingness to repay as \nagreed . \n• establish a system of independent, ongoing credit review and appropriate communication to management and to the board of directors. \n• take adequate account of capital planning consistent with strategic planning and \nassociated concentration of credit risk . \n• are appropriate to the banks’ size and the nature and scope of the banks’ activities. \n Loan documentation practices that \n• enable the bank s to make informed lending decisions and to assess risk, as necessary, on \nan ongoing basis. \n• identify the loans’ purpose and sources of repayment and a ssess the borrowers’ ability to \nrepay the indebtedness in a timely manner . \n• ensure that any claim against borrowers is legally enforceable. \n• demonstrate appropriate administration and monitoring of loans. \n• take account of the loans’ size and complexity. \n \nPrivate student loans vary significantly in terms of underwriting, pricing, maximum loan amounts, and repayment terms. Underwriting and product terms should appropriately recognize the risks of unsecured lending to a higher-risk borrower population (by virtue of unproven credit records). The ability of students to achieve gainful employment after \ngraduation is one of the determinants of default frequency. \n \nPrivate student loans should be carefully underwritten to minimize the occurrence of default or the need to provide repayment assistance. Banks should have adequate and sound credit policies and procedures that focus on the main criteria for decision-making and verification \n Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 18 Student Lending processes. The following are some of the underwriting factors and requirements that banks \nhave used in private student lending:41 \n \n• Educational institution and education program \n• Borrower and cosigner creditworthiness \n• Maximum student debt per academic year and cost of attendance ( COA) \n• Marketing channel \n• Credit bureau risk score \n• Credit history \n• Minimum gross income \n• Income verification \n• Loan feature s and structure \n• Citizenship status and U.S. residency \n \nEducational Institutions \n \nSome private student lenders use factors relating to the educational institution s that \nborrowers attend for determining underwriting and pricing of private student loans.42 Banks \nhave consider ed \n \n• educational institutions’ financial history, accreditation, financial stability , and long- term \nviability . \n• the average time and cost to complete degrees or programs . \n• the average dropout, graduation, and completion rates . \n• employment rates and average salaries for graduates and, if available, for dropouts . \n• banks’ own default rate experience regarding the educational institutions’ borrowers who \nrecently entered repayment. \n \nWhen banks target borrowers enrolled at particular institutions or in specific education programs, comprehensive and effective due diligence is critical to understanding the level of risk assum ed. Banks should update and review this information regularly , or at least \nannually, and perform the due diligence as long as the relationships with particular \neducational institution s continue. \n Some banks consider lending only to borrowers attending educational institutions that pass the Education Department’s eligibility criter ia. School eligibility is defined by the Education \nDepartment as those institutions qualified to participate in Title IV of the HEA, and one of \nthe required conditions for a school to qualify is to have a n acceptable cohort default rate \n \n41 Banks using factors that may not be related to loan terms or borrower creditworthiness, such as the \neducational institution or citizenship status, should closely consider and monitor the fair lending implications of \nthese factors. Refer to the “Educational Institutions” section of this booklet. \n \n42 Refer to GA O-10-86R, “Higher Education: Factors Lenders Consider in Making Lending Decisions for \nPrivate Education Loans,” November 17, 2009. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 19 Student Lending (CDR) on federal student loans.43 CDR c onsideration in private lending for school eligibility, \nunderwriting, or pricing may have a disproportionate negative impact on minority students \nwho disproportionately attend schools with higher CDRs.44 Banks should carefully analyze \nthe potential fair lending implications of using CDR and other non-individual factors and document the legitimate business need for their use. Another criteri on that banks generally consider is the type of educational institution. The \nEducation Department defines three types of eligible institutions of higher education: public or private nonprofit institutions, propr ietary institutions (private and for -profit), and public or \nprivate nonprofit postsecondary vocational institutions defined in 34 CFR 600.4, \n34 CFR 600.5, 34 CFR 600.6, and 34 CFR 600.9. B anks that extend loan s to borrowers who \nattend nontraditional education programs or alternative programs should take into consideration that certain trade schools or vocational institutions may not have access to federal funding under Title IV. Therefore, private student loans extended to f inance \nattendance in these institutions may be dischargeable in bankruptcy. \n To manage risk, banks should track loan performance and report on established concentration limits for each student loan program, geographic area, school type (graduate program, four- or two -year institution , or trade school), origination channel (e.g., school or online), and loan \nquality or risk grade. \n \nBorrower Creditworthiness \n Banks should have underwriting criteria designed to measure the borrowers’ financial capacity, in term s of disposable income available for orderly debt repayment, and willingness \nto repay, typically based on past performance on financial obligations. Because there is no reliable method for considering future income or other future events in the underwriting process of private student loans, banks typically require cosigners on loans. This allows for additional borrower support if borrowers are unable to make loan payments after graduation or program completion. A cosigner is any person who assumes personal liability, in any capacity, for the obligation of a borrower without receiving goods, services, or money in return for the obligation. The cosigner is equally and severally liable and is expected to make paymen ts on the primary \nborrower’s debt should that borrower default. Having a cosigner is a way for a private student loan borrower with a low income or poor or limited credit history to qualify for and \nobtain more favorable financing terms. \n Most banks offer cosigners a release option after the initial 36 to 48 consecutive, on- time \npayments of principal and interest after repayment begins, subject to verification of the primary borrower’s continuous ability to repay. Most banks offer cosigner release in the unfortunate event of the student borrower’s death or total and permanent disability. Banks \n \n43 Refer to 34 CFR 668.206, “ Consequences of Cohort Default Rates on Yo ur Ability to P articipate in Title IV, \nHEA Programs .” \n \n44 Refer to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Private Student Loans , page 80, August 29, 2012. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 20 Student Lending that offer the cosigner release option should keep track of this feature in the loan agreements \nand fulfill the terms . \n \nA key component in underwriting student loan applications is the assessment of affordability of the loan and taking into account the borrowers’ and cosigners ’ (if any) ability to meet all \ndebt service requirements for existing and proposed loans. B anks may account for adequate \nmargin in debt service requirements to protect against adverse changes in borrowers’ and \ncosigners ’ (if any) circumstances. \n When determining ability to repay, the bank’s underwriting criteria rely heavily on the \ncosigner’s income streams and assets while taking into account all of the cosigner’s \nobligations. A credible analysis should conclude that the borrower and cosigner can meet all debt service requirements for existing and proposed loans using regularly amortizing payments. In some private student loan pr ograms, borrower s may be able to qualify on their own \nwithout the need for cosigners. To qualify, borrowers should have credit scores that meet the \nprogram minimums and may need to satisfy any employment, income, or asset requirements. \n When evaluating borrowers’ and cosigner s’ ability to repay, banks should consider all debt \nobligations, including monthly rent or mortgage, auto loans, other student loans (in repayment and deferment), alimony and child support, minimum credit card payments, and \nother debt payments. \n The determination of borrowers’ and cosigners ’ ability to repay should be based on reliable \ninformation , including documented and verified income. Some of the most common and \nacceptable documentation includes \n• recent pay stub s. \n• W-2 forms . \n• evidence of payroll direct deposit. \n• personal or business t ax returns . \n• signed 1099 f orms. \n• verification of employment through employer direct contact. \n• divorce decree or other legal document to verify child support or alimony payments. \n• other appropriate documentation, such as a social security award letter and investment \nstatements. \n \nCredit Bureau Risk Score \n \nAs a credit overlay, banks often use credit scores in loan underwriting and rely on credit \nbureau data to gauge credit history, payment experience, and performance. Credit scores \nproject the probability of future payment performance based on past experience. For some \nbanks, borrowers ’ credit score s serve as the key requirement in the decision to approve or \ndecline application s in the underwriting process. Most banks, however, use credit scores for \nscreening and subsequently perform addi tional review based on other credit criteria. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 21 Student Lending As with any other consumer loan product, b anks that use credit scores in private student \nlending should control credit quality by setting appropriate cutoff scores based on acceptable \ndefault risk or loss rate. Bank management may change the cutoff credit score, and this \nchange alters the risk profile of the originated loans. The cutoff credit score is one of the \ncontrol mechanisms for volume (quantity) and profit (quality) in private student loans. As a basic principle, the higher the cutoff credit score, the lower the approval rate and fewer the \ndelinquency problems. Decisions to change the cutoff credit score reflect a change of strategy, a change in quality of applicants , and a change in expected level of profitability. \nBank management should ensure that credit scoring models are used appropriately and are \nfunctioning effectively . Bank management should \n \n• thoroughly understand the credit scoring models. \n• use credit scoring models for their intended purpose. \n• validate or revalidate the credit scoring models’ performance regularly. \n• review tracking reports, including the performance of overrides. \n• take appropriate action when the credit scoring models’ performance deteriorates, \nincluding reviewing bank lending strategies to determine their effect on the credit scoring \nmodels ; actively managing the credit scoring model cutoff strategies; or developing new \ncredit s coring models. \n• ensure the credit scoring model s comply with fair lending regulations . \n Credit scoring models used in student lending should be subject to sound model validation processes , including evaluation of conceptual soundness, ongoing monitoring, and outcomes \nanalysis. \n For a basic explanation of credit score models, refer to OCC Bulletin 1997-24, “Credit \nScoring Models: Examiner Guidance,” and OCC Bulletin 2011-12, “Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk Management.” Banks should have credit underwri ting criteria that include measurements of borrower s’ and \ncosigners ’ capacity to repay the loan s (debt- to-income or payment- to-income), acceptable \ndocumentation, cutoff credit score and tolerance for overrides, and school eligibility requirements . Banks that have underwriting standards that are less stringent than industry and \nmarket standards should establish portfolio concentration limits on these lesser-qualified borrowers to minimize the banks’ exposure to a manageable level. \n \nLoan Feature and Structure \n Banks offer a range of private student loan features and structures. Interest rates may be fixed or adjustable; repayment terms may be straight amortization or graduated; and repayment periods may be short er (10 years or less) or longer (over 10 years). Banks generally consider \nthese factors jointly in the qualification process and should develop a range of reasonable tolerances for each factor. Underwriting should be based on prudent and appropriate underwriting standards, taking into account borrowers’ characteristics and private student \nloan attributes. \n Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 22 Student Lending Banks that offer graduated repayment terms at origination should follow the prudent \nstandards outlined in OCC Bulletin 2015-7, “ Interagency Guidance on Private Student Loans \nWith Graduated Repayment Ter ms at Origination .” Borrowers and banks generally are best \nserved by amortizing repayment of principal and interest over reasonable periods. When considering graduated repayment terms , banks should promote orderly repayment over the \nlife of the loans. Bank s should consider providing longer repayment periods (e.g. , 20 years) \nfor larger loans and shorter repayment periods for smaller loans. \nMaximum Student Debt \n \nBanks generally set p rivate student loan amount limits according to the published cost of \nattendance at the borrowers’ schools, with lifetime caps based on the students ’ program s of \nstudy. The schools set the overall loan limit for each student based on qualified education \nexpenses up to the cost of attendance, less all other student aid receiv ed,45 and any other \nloans already applied to the cost for the academic year. \n \nBanks require school certification or verification of enrollment to ensure that students are borrowing responsibly and that the loan amounts requested do not exceed the borrowers’ COA. School financial aid office s certify borrowers’ need for loans and the amount that \nborrowers are eligible to borrow. S chool certification provides the following additional \ninformation : academic period, enrollment status and grade level, expected graduation date, \nand disbursement date. Federal law requires that before lender s may disburse private student \nloans, the lender s must obtain completed and signed self- certification form s\n46 from \nborrowers. Disbursement of funds may include certified check s jointly payable to the students and the \nschools, or electronic funds transfer s of loan proceeds to student accounts at the eligible \nschools. Depending on the loan purpose, there is generally a cumulative limit\n47 on total loans \nthat banks grant and variation on loan terms (5, 10, 15, 20, or more years). \nPricing \n Pricing is a key component of underwriting. Private student l oans can have either a fixed \ninterest rate or a variable interest rate. Fixed -rate loans are determined at the time of \napplication approval and remain the same for the life of the loan. A v ariable rate is based on \nan index such as the London Interbank Offered Rate ( LIBOR )\n48 or prime lending r ate plus a \nfixed margin rate determined by borrower and cosigner creditworthiness at the time of application. The variable index rate may change on a monthly or quarterly basis. Banks price \n \n45 Such aid includes grants, scholarships, fellowships, and financial awards. \n \n46 This information is included in the borrower’s financial award letter from the school. The form is also \navailable from the school’s financial aid office. \n \n47 The cumulative limit includes both federal and private student loans. \n \n48 LIBOR is the average interest rate paid on deposits of U.S. dollars in the London market. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 23 Student Lending private student loans depending on the risk profiles of borrowers and cosigners. Loans that \nhave cosigners generally are priced significantly lower than those without cosigners. \n Banks should carefully balance pricing for risk and avoid errors that can threaten the portfolios and their performance. There are consequences if bank s price below or above \nmarket. Any pricing above market could potentially create adverse sele ction, meaning only \nthe least creditworthy private student loan borrowers apply. This happens because the lower-risk borrowers take advantage of less costly financing options available to them. The highest -\nrisk borrower s apply for and accept retail credit at almost any rate. \n Often, banks offer borrower benefits such as an interest rate reduction when repayment begins. The interest rate reduction generally ranges between 25 and 100 basis points and is \nprovided if certain conditions are met , including the borrowers agreeing to automatic debit \npayments from personal checking or savings accounts, the borrowers making specified consecutive on-time payments, the borrowers graduating or completing programs, or the existence of qualifying bank relationships. Examiners should assess whether the bank has well -defined underwriting criteria that \nestablish prudent risk limits, including minimum credit scores, reasonable debt -to-income \nratios, maximum loan amount and duration, and appropriate pricing. \n \nOther Requirements \n Except for continuing education loans, bank loans also require that borrowers be enrolled at \nleast half time. In addition to credit qualification, private student loans are subject to \ncompletion of loan applications and consumer credit agreement s, verification of application \ninforma tion, self- certification forms, and school certification . \n Through the school channel, colleges or universit ies certify the loans. School certification \nmeans that the school validates that the student has been accepted an d will attend the school \nthrough which he or she is applying for the loan. Using the school channel ensures that the \nborrower obtains only funds necessary for his or her education and that funds are distributed directly to the school, not the borrower. Sch ool verification of application includes checking \nthe accuracy of information reported by the student on the FAFSA and may include requesting a copy of the student’s tax returns and, if applicable, the student’s parents’ tax \nreturns . \n Banks should ensure t hat funds are being used to pay for borrowers ’ tuition and other \neducation expenses . Most banks use the school channel instead of direct -to-consumer \nchannel because the school channel is less susceptible to misuse of funds and fraud. D irect-\nto-consumer loan s generally do not require school certification and can result in borrowers \napplying for funds in excess of the cost. Banks that use the direct -to-consumer channel \nrelease private student loan funds directly to borrowers and lose control over use of the funds. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 24 Student Lending Banks are expected to follow applicable laws and regulations when underwriting and \noriginating private student loans, including the following : \n \n• TILA : All disclosures are made in an accurate and timely manner , as required by TILA. \n• FCRA : A credit bureau report is requested only if there is a permissible purpose to \nrequest it under the FCRA. \n• ECOA: Loan programs must be administered in a nondiscriminatory manner (including \nmarketing, underwriting, pricing, and servicing), and a ccurate and co nsistent adverse \naction treatment of all declined applications must be documented and follow ed as \nrequired by ECOA. \n• GLBA : Privacy notices are provided, and information sharing is limited, as required by \nGLBA. \n• EFTA : Electronic transfers of loan proceeds to consumers must comply with EFTA \nrequirements. \n• Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices (U DAP ) and Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive \nActs or Practices ( UDAAP ): All elements of marketing, underwriting, and origination \nmust comply with the prohibitions on unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices \ncontained in section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 and Title X of \nDodd–Frank.49 \n \nUnderwriting Exceptions \n Banks’ private student lending underwriting polic ies and criteria should reflect the banks’ \nstated risk appetite s. Any underwriting exceptions could potentially change the risk profile of \napproved loans and the portfolios overall. The more discretion injected into the process, the higher the potential for exceptions. Policy exceptions generally are unavoidable because no underwriting policy is comprehensive enough to cover all possible situations. Banks should have the necessary MIS to identify and track exceptions. \n Banks should establish limitations for each type of exception and monitor adherence to those limits. Reports should track all exceptions to significant underwriting policy, scoring, documentation, and school eligibility requirements. Bank management should ensure that the infor matio n is regularly analyzed to determine causes and impact s, and, when necessary, \nimplement corrective action. \n Examiners should assess whether banks ’ private student loan MIS have adequate detail to \nfacilitate analysis of exceptions overall and by type to determin e if exceptions significantly \naffect the portfolios’ risk profile s. To make this determination, examiners should consider the \nexceptions’ volume and trends and the ongoing performance of loans originated with exceptions. If the performance of loans originated with exceptions is weaker than that of loans conforming to underwriting criteria, bank management should require stricter adherence to underwriting policy. If performance is better, bank management should consider revising bank policy. \n \n \n49 Refer to OCC Advisory Letter 2002- 3, “Guidance on Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices,” which sets forth \nthe OCC’s guidance on unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 25 Student Lending Excep tion and performance tracking should be sufficiently granular to enable the board and \nbank management to drill down into the sources of exceptions. By evaluating exceptions and \nsubsequent performance by product, credit quality, school, channel, etc., bank management can target corrective action to the actual source of any problem. \n \nLoan Servicing and Administration \n Private student loan servicers are responsible for properly administering loans from origination through final payment. B anks or third parties perform student loan servicing. \nUsing reliable third -party servicer s can be an effective way to standardize procedures, \nfacilitate growth , and minimize costs. Additionally, third -party servicers are more likely to \nhave the scale, system infrastructure, and , in most cases, personnel experience to carry out \nany specialized student loan requirements (e.g. , use of deferments and grace periods) . Banks \nthat use third -party servicers should ensure that loans are administered appropriately and \ncomply with bank policies and procedures and applicable laws and regulations.\n50 Banks \nshould follow the supervisory guidelines regarding risk management outlined in OCC \nBulletin 2013-29, “ Third -Party Relationships: Risk Management Guidance.” B anks’ risk \nmanagement system s should reflect the complexity of banks’ third -party activities and the \noverall level of risk involved. The following terminology is commonly assoc iated with repayment of student loans: \n \n• In-school period : The time during which the borrower is enrolled at least half time at an \neligible school. The in -school period ends when the borrower graduates or leaves school, \nor when the borrower’s enrollment drops below half time.\n51 \n• In-school deferment: A period during which no payment is required while the borrower \nis enrolled at a “qualifying” school, per the bank’s definition, as no less than a half- time \nstudent.52 \n• Repayment period: The period during which payments of principal and interest are \nrequired. The repayment period typically follows any applicable in-school deferment or \ngrace period. \n• Grace period: A standard six -month period after graduation or withdrawal from school \nduring which no payment is required. This grace period may be automatically granted to \na borrower who leaves school or drops below half time bef ore repayment begins.53 \n• Extended grace period: An additional, consecutive, one-time period during which no \npayment is required for up to six months after the initial grace period. An extended grace \nperiod typically is granted to the borrower who may be having difficulty finding \n \n50 These include the FDCPA (15 USC 1692 et seq.) and OCC Bulletin 2014- 37, “Consumer Debt Sales: Risk \nManagement Guidance.” \n \n51 Refer to 34 CFR 685.207(b)(1). \n \n52 Refer to 34 CFR 685.204(b). \n \n53 Refer to 34 CFR 674.2(b). Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 26 Student Lending employment before the repayment period starts . The extended grace period counts toward \nthe maximum lifetime allowable payment forbearance of no more than 12 months.54 \n \nRepayment Terms \n \nBanks generally offer various repayment options or repayment terms for student loans: \n \n• Immediate repayment: This repayment option requires t he borrower to begin making \nprincipal and interest payments, usually no more than 60 days after the final disbursement \ndate of the loan. \n• Deferred principal and interest: This option involves full deferment of principal and \ninterest payments during school while capitalizing the accrued interest . Repayment \nbegin s six months after the earliest of (1) graduation, (2) the borrower ceasing to be \nenrolled in school, or (3) the borrower being enrolled less than half time. Banks generally \nhave a limit on how long the deferment lasts, which is usually tied to the expected completion time period of the borrower’s education program. \n• Fully amortizing repayment : This option invol ves a periodic loan payment, part of \nwhich is principal and part of which is interest . If the borrower makes payments \naccording to the loan ’s amortization schedule, the loan will be paid off by the end of its \nterm. The b orrower and the bank generally are best served by amortizing repayments of \nprincipal and interest over a r easonable time period . \n• Graduated repayment: This repayment structure allows for lower monthly payments \nthat gradually increase. Banks that offer this option at origination should follow safe and \nsound lending practices and regulatory principles outlined in OCC Bulletin 2015-7, “Interagency Guidance on Private Student Loans With Graduated Repayment Terms at \nOrigination .” Banks may offer borrowers graduated repayment terms in addition to f ixed \namortizing terms and provide flexibility to repay the debt sooner if borrowers’ incomes increase more quickly than projected. When underwriting private student loans with \ngraduated repayment , banks should consider aligning payment terms with the borro wer’s \nincome. Banks should establish the time period during which graduated repayment terms will be offered, usually at the beginning of the repayment period. \n• Interest only: Some banks may require some form of in-school repayment that includes \nfull or nomi nal interest payment. Interest -only payments generally begin no more than \n60 days after the final disbursement date. \n Loan servicing includes all activities during the in -school, grace, and repayment periods. \nLoan servicing includes various activities, such as \n• verif ying the borrower’s in -school status. \n• transition ing to loan repayment. \n• establishing repayment terms . \n• applying payments. \n \n54 Refer to Chief National Bank Examiner Policy Guidance (CNBE) 2010 -2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: \nOCC Bulletin 2000- 20—Application to Private Student Lending.” This policy guidance previously was \navailable only internally to OCC employees and is made public with this booklet. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 27 Student Lending • granting deferment and forbearance. \n• reporting loan information to credit bureaus. \n• responding to inqui ries. \n \nThe loan servicer receives and processes updated enrollment information through various \nprocesses , including certification from applications, deferment forms, letters from a school \nofficial, the National Student Loan Data System —Student Status Confirmation Report \n(NSLDS -SSCR)55 process, and direct communication from the school. When the loan \nservicer is notified that the borrower is no longer attending school or is not carrying the required credits, the borrower generally enters a grace period. The gr ace period is intended to \nprovide the borrower with time to find employment and prepare to repay the loan. The borrower is generally allowed a six -month grace period before loan repayment begins. \n During the grace period, the loan servicer is generally expected to establish a relationship \nwith the borrower to help the borrower understand his or her repayment status and obligations, promote any self-service payment option offered by the bank (e.g., online), and obtain updated borrower contact information. The loan s ervicer should help educate and \ninform the borrower regarding the tools and options available to assist him or her in managing the student loan and options to receive bill correspondence e lectronically. \n Management should ensure that loan servicers adhere to applicable federal laws and \nregulations, including the following: \n• ECOA (Regulation B) \n• EFTA (Regulation E) \n• FCRA (Regulation V) \n• FDCPA \n• “Privacy of Consumer Financial Information” (Regulation P) \n• USA PATRIOT Act \n• TILA (Regulation Z) \n• SCRA \n• MLA \n \nBecause private student loans are unsecured debt and not federally guaranteed , loan servicers \nneed to be highly proficient in ensuring that loans are properly originated and appropriately serviced . If banks use third -party servicers , these servicers generally indemnify banks and \nhold them harmless from liability for any deficiency in originating or servicing student loans. \nIndemnification is considered best practice when using third- party servicers . The strength of \nthe indemnification is closely tied to the third party’s financial condition, and importantly, \nindemnification provisions are not a substitute for proper risk- management practices. \n \n \n55 The NSLDS is a national database of information on Title IV aid, including FFELP loans. The NSLDS was \ndeveloped to provide loan -level information on Title IV loans and to provide an integrated view of other Title \nIV programs. NSLDS overall goals are to improve the quality and accessibility of student aid data, reduce the \nburden of administering Title IV aid, and minimize abuse within the aid programs through accurate tracking of \nfunds awarded to assist the postsecondary students for whom the programs were designed. Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 28 Student Lending Examiners should expect banks to have a sound third -party program that includes periodic \ndue diligence, review, and monitoring. Banks should conduct periodic on- site third -party \nservicer audits to assess whether the third part ies are adhering to the banks’ private student \nloan polic ies and procedures. Banks should have third -party metrics and appropriate MIS \nreports that include loan performance by third -party servicers. One of the key components of \na third -party servicer program is a Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements \nNumber 16 review (SSAE 16) . This annual review helps monitor third -party servicer s’ \noperational soundness and ability to comply with bank policies and procedures and \napplicable laws and regulations. Bank m anagement should have appropriate processes and \nprocedures when third -party service rs are given unacceptable or equivalent ratings during \nannual reviews. \n Bank m anagement should be mindful of student loan servicing deficiencies highlighted by \nthe Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB )\n56 in its annual ombudsman reports.57 \n \nCollections \n In most banks, whether done in-house or through third parties, loan servicing is responsible for loan collections of private student loans. Loan servicers have specialized collections staff whose responsibilities may involve the collections of both private and federal guaranteed student loans. Whether private or federal, student loans are generally difficult to discharge in \nbankruptcy. T here are time limits or statutes of limitations , however, on how long private \nstudent lenders can try to collect on the underlying debt. These time limits or statutes of \nlimitation vary by state but are usually about three to six years .\n58 If bank s sue and obtain \ncourt judgments, the bank s may have from five to as many as 20 years to enforce court \njudgments. Because student loans are unsecured consumer debt, loan servicers should take appropriate \nsteps to avoid loan defaults by borrowers . Delinquent loans should be actively managed and \ncollections efforts effectively performed. Once l oans enter the repayment phase, the \nservicer s’ main objectives are to collect payments, pursue delinquent accounts, and minimize \nloan defaults while providing effective customer service. An effective student loan collection process is a key component of controlling and minimizing credit losses. Whether performed by a third party or in -house, the process should \nbe guided by well -established policies and procedures and should be managed effectively at \neach stage for optimal and legal collection of principal and interest to occur. Private student loan servicers must adhere to t he FDCPA , which prohibits abusive debt collection practices. \n \n \n56 Dodd– Frank establishes an ombudsman for student loans within the CFPB who is responsible for making \n“appropriate recommendations” to the CFPB Director, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of \nEducation, and Congress. \n \n57 Refer to Annual Report of the CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman, 2012, 2013, and 2014. \n \n58 Refer to “State -by-State List of Statute of Limitations on Debt.” Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 29 Student Lending The problems associated with an inadequately managed collection function include \n \n• reduced earnings caused by increased loan losses and reduced recoveries. \n• inaccurate or untimely communications to senior management and the directorate. \n• inaccurate reporting of past -due and charged-off loans, and imprudent management \ndecisions. \n• insufficient allowance for loan losses caused by weak MIS, inaccurate past due figures, \nand the improper use of deferment, forbearance, and other collection- related practices . \n• inadequate audit trail of collection and recover y activities. \n• poorly trained employees, resulting in loss of productivity, collections, and recoveries. \n• violations of law s and regulations. \n \nTechnology \n \nThe loan collection function generally relies on automation and technology to be \ncompetitive, remain compliant, operate efficiently, and increase profitability. Banks and third partie s generally use technology and historical information to formulate a plan or strategy for \noptimizing their collection efforts. Communica tion technology has grown in sophistication \nover time. This technology is used to leverage an integrated and multi-channel approach to borrower communication with voice alerts, outbound i nteractive voice response, predictive \ndialing, preview calling, e- mails, and custom w ebsites. Even skip tracing techniques have \nevolved and use social media to locate borrowers. Whatever form of communication banks or third parties use to contact borrower s, privacy is a significant consideration. Banks must \nadhere to the FDCPA and other applicable laws and regulations, including state dialer and \nmessaging restrictions, operator and consent rules, and rules addressing identification data \nblocks, drop rates, call times, and other subjects. In contrast with communication techn ology used in the loan collection function, the \ninfrastructure used to administer and service private student loans has limited functionality. These are generally legacy sy stems designed primarily to support repayment options offered \nin the federal guaranteed loan programs.\n59 These platforms were not designed to \naccommodate TDR60 analysis and financial reporting requirements. Consequently, some \nworkout options for private student loans (e.g. , restructuring or modifications) would likely \nrequire platform technology enhancements. \n \nExaminers should have a general understanding of the technologies employed by in -house \ncollection departments or third parties to evaluate their effectiveness. Bank management \nshould appropriately oversee and govern third -party relationships, and there should be no \n \n59 Examples include the Graduated Repayment Plan, Income -Contingent Repayment Term, Extended \nRepayment, and Income -Based Repayment. Refer to appendix E of this booklet for more information. \n \n60 Accounting Standards Codification Subtopic 310- 40 states that a TDR is “a restructuring in which a bank, for \neconomic or other reasons related to a borrower’s financial difficulties, grants a concession to the borrower that \nit would not otherwise consider.” Accounting Standards Codification 310 -40-15-9 states that a TDR includes “a \nmodification of the loan terms, such as a reduction of the stated interest rate, principal, or accrued interest or an \nextension of the maturity date at a stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for new debt with \nsimilar risk.” Introduction > Risk Management and Control Systems \nComptroller’s Handbook 30 Student Lending gaps in banks ’ information technology risk management programs. If loan servicers are using \nwork -arounds to adhere to requirements of TDR enhanced accounting and reporting, \nexaminers should ensure that the banks have the appropriate internal controls. \n \nCollection Strategies \n Collection strategies determine which accounts are put in collection queues , the timing of \ncollection activities, and the type of contact (e.g., phone calls, collection letters, and legal letters). Seasonality is a factor in private student loan collections. Borrowers who graduate in \nDecember begin repayment after the six -month grace period. That is why many accounts \nenter first payment default between May and June. By the same token, borrowers who graduate in May enter the collection queue in the fourth quarter of the year. Bank management should adjust its collection strateg ies and staffing to accommodate this \nseasonality . \n Most banks with effective loan collection units engage in delinquency prevention. Some of the most common strategies they employ are the following : \n \n• Early withdrawal strategy: Banks send high- level e -mails and perform outbound calls \nto borrowers who withdrew from school and provide counseling on repayment options \nduring the grace period. The goal of the strategy is to reduce loan defaults for this population. \n• Pre-repayment strategy: Banks generally make outbound calls to borrowers who \nrecently graduated and borrowers coming out of forbearance. These calls educate customers on the amount and due date of their payments, methods of payment, and bank contact information (e.g., w ebsite, e -mail, phone number, and address). This strategy is \nalso helpful in determining if skip tracing is necessary . \n Another consideration in private student loan collection is borrower mobility. New graduates may move immediately after graduation or separation from school. Banks recognize that \nsome student loan defaults result from failure to locate borrowers or otherwise having no contact with borrowers. D efault and debt management programs can work only when bank s \ncan locate borrower s. Pre-repayment strategies that include soliciting updated borrower and \ncosigner information, including cellphone numbers, have proved to be effective. These efforts help borrowers transition from deferment and the grace period into making payments. In many banks, collection strategies rely on behavior scoring models to segment accounts by risk. Transaction analytics als o help in developing effective behavior score models that adapt \nor adjust to portfolio changes. High -risk accounts should have higher collection phone call \nattempts and customer contacts to increase likelihood of collection. Banks use behavior score \nmodels to predict likelihood of collection and to more precisely alter banks’ actions and timing for collection activity. Banks use analytics and segmentation to determine not only the appropriate collection action but also whether to send accounts to third -party collection \nagencies and at what point to do so. Examiners should review and discuss with bank \nmanagement the collection strateg ies and reports generated. Banks should maintain close Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 31 Student Lending control over their collection strategies and understand the i mpact of strategy changes to \ndollars collected. \n \nSupervision of collection staff is important. Bank m anagement should ensure that collection \nsupervisors have appropriate collections experience and good management skills. Bank management should align incentives with collection goals and collector performance \nmeasures, and should require that collection supervisors regularly review the collectors’ performance. Collection activities should be subject to regular quality assurance and internal audit review. \n \nInternal Audit \n Because of the variety of risks inherent in private student lending activities, internal audit \ncoverage should include evaluati ng all the risks and controls in the bank’s private student \nlending operations. The scope and frequency of these audits should be based on the risk of associated controls and complexity of banks’ private student lending activities . Internal audit \nstaff should be able to identify control breakdowns and ensure appropriate remediation. Internal audit should assess strat egic business risks and the overall risk management \nframework, including compl ying with bank policies, approved practices and limits , and \napplicable laws and regulations. Internal audit staff should be independent and \nknowledgeable about private student le nding activities. \n Staff should report audit findings, including identified control weaknesses, to the board or a designated committee. The board and bank management should ensure that the internal audit \nstaff has the necessary qualifications and expertise to review private student lending \nactivities. \n \nRisk Rating and Examiner Guidance \n \nClassification and Charge-O ff Policies \n Private student loan account classification and charge- off practices are addressed in OCC \nBulletin 2000-20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy : \nPolicy Implementation .” In general, under this policy, private student loans that reach \n90 days past due are classified “substandard,” and loans that become 120 days past due are classified as a loss and charged off. The guidance includes special rules for bankrupt, fraudulent, and deceased borrower accounts, and examiners should review this bulletin \nclosely before considering bank s’ collection activities. \n For private student loans, just because loan s are classified as a loss or charged off does not \nmean that the lender should stop using workout or modification programs or that loss mitigation or collection efforts should cease , unless prohibited by law . It simply means that \nfor safety and soundness reasons and financial and investor transparency, banks should follow appropriate accounting practices. Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 32 Student Lending MIS for Collections \n \nThe volume and trends in delinquencies and losses are central to evaluating collection s and \noverall portfolio performance. Robust, timely MIS reporting identifies loans or portfolio \nsegments that are not performing as expected and helps bank management understand \nportfolio quality. The bank’s set of MIS reports on private student loans should give bank \nmanagement a view of loans that are in repayment, as well as the range of loss mitigation and collection activities in which the bank engages. The reports should provide bank management with a comprehensive and accurate view of the portfolio’s risk including tracking effectiveness of the bank’s forbearance, workout, and modification programs. \n Through bank MIS reports, bank management should be able to isolate key products, product combinations, and borrower characteristics to help understand which factors drive performance. Besides helping management track portfolio performance against expectations, bank MIS reports should a ssist in understanding policy limitations and enable management to \nbenchmark against industry metrics. MIS reports should not only support the collection process but also help ensure timely recognition of losses. Because of the nature of student loans, t here could be a significant time lag between the \ndisbursement of loan funds and the start of repayment. Therefore, any private student loan MIS should provide portfolio metrics that clearly distinguish the account status (in repayment versus deferment ). \n Equally or even more important, MIS reports should help bank management understand the factors influencing portfolio performance (e.g., underwriting, marketing, and collection staffing). Understanding these factors promotes a more realistic assessment of portfolio performance as well as an accurate evaluation of the workload and effectiveness of the bank’s collection function. MIS help s ensure that remedial actions implemented are properly \nconstructed to address the problem rather than a symptom. For example, private student loan MIS should have appropriate segmentation and granularity necessary to monitor performance for each school or education program based on delinquencies and losses. This granularity of MIS reports helps bank management evaluate school relationships and terminate poorly performing relationships and programs when necessary. \n The roll rate report ,\n61 for example, allow s bank management to review the number and dollar \nvolume of accounts that move from current to 30-days delinquent, 30- to 60-days, etc. This information helps management to predict the charge-off rate as far as six months into the future. In addition, this report can aid management decisions regarding collection staffing levels. \n \n \n61 Roll rates measure the movement of accounts and balances from one payment status to another (e.g., \npercentage of accounts or dollars that were current last month rolling to 30 days past due this month). Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 33 Student Lending Examiners should evaluate the bank’s MIS for timely, accurate, relevant, and effective \ninformation and should strongly criticize the absence of appropriate tracking and monitoring \nreports . \n \nWorkout Program and Debt Management \n The Education Department allows several repayment and debt management\n62 alternatives for \nfinancially distressed borrowers with federal student loans. These repayment alternatives \ninclude extended repayment plans such as graduated repayment, income-contingent repayment term, extended repayment, and income -based repayment . Debt forgiveness is \nanother alternative. Some of the se alternatives may not be appropriate for private student \nloans and may not be consistent with safe and sound banking principles. The Education \nDepartment defines federal student loan default as 270 days past due, compared with \n120 days past due for banks’ private student loans. The Education Department also allows \nloan deferment due to unemployment for a maximum of three years. These Education Department programs and practices have brought pressure to banks to align their repayment \nand workout programs for private student loans to those of federal student loans. B anks have \nsome latitude to offer similar federal workout programs to private student loans. B anks, \nhowever, should do so while adhering to safety and soundness requirements and following existing banking guidance and GAAP. Two OCC issuances provide guidance related to student loan deferment, forbearance, and \nmodifications. First, OCC Bulletin 2000-20, “ Uniform Retail Credit Classification and \nAccount Management Policy : Policy Implementation,” provides general guidance on \nclassifying retail credits for regulatory purposes and establishing policies for working with borrowers experiencing temporary financial difficulties . Second, the examiner guidance, \nCNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000 -20—\nApplication to Private Student Lending,” affirms the applicability and fundamental principles of the Retail Classification Policy to private s tudent lending while recognizing the unique \naspects of higher education financing.\n63 \n OCC Bulletin 2000-20 and CNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV) address supervisory expectations for risk management of loan workout programs and arrangements, classification of loans, and regulatory reporting and accounting considerations. Examiners and bankers should remember that workout programs can be used to help borrowers overcome temporary financial difficulties , if those actions \n \n• do not cloud the true performance and delinquency status of the portfolio. \n• are reported accurately for call report and financial reporting purposes . \n• are based on the borrower’s renewed willingness and ability to repay the loan . \n• are structured and controlled in accordance with sound internal policies. \n \n \n62 Workout program s are commonly referred to as “debt management” in the student lending industry. \n \n63 This policy guidance previously was available only internally to OCC employees and is being made public \nwith this booklet. Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 34 Student Lending Bank management should note that regulatory agencies encourage financial institutions to \nwork constructively with private student loan borrowers experiencing financial difficulties and should consider workout arrangements that increase the potential for such borrowers to \nrepay private student loans whenever workout arrangements are economically feasible and appropriate.\n64 Bank s should adopt their own standards for workouts and modifications and \nmonitor the effectiveness of those standards. Banks should provide clear and practical information to student loan borrowers that explains the options available, general eligibility criteria, the process for requesting workouts, and information on how to contact lenders or loan servicer s. \n There are several repayment assistance remedies unique to private student loans, some of which are described in this section . \n \nDeferment \n In-school deferment is a temporary postponement of payments while borrowers are attending \nschool (enrolled at least half time). Repayment of private student loans generally begins \n60 days after disbursement. Most borrowers opt for in-school deferment of principal and interest. Dur ing this period, the interest is capitalized and added to the principal balance of \nthe loan. Repayment then begins six months after graduation, when borrowers are no longer enrolled in school, or when borrowers are enrolled less than half time. Banks tie the length of deferment to the expected completion time of borrowers’ education programs . Deferment \nshould not affect other terms of the loan, including maturity. Six-month grace is a standard period after graduation or withdrawal from school during \nwhich no payment is required, as interest continues to be capitalized. This grace period is \nautomatically granted to borrowers who leave school or drop below half time before repayment begins. This grace period is ordinarily granted without conditions or \ndocumentation of any hardship. During the grace period, banks should contact borrower s to \ncounsel them on repayment terms, the repayment process , and repayment responsibilities to \nensure orderly transition to repayment. \nForbearance and Extension \n Forbearance permits borrowers to temporarily postpone making payments or reduce the amount of payments for a limited and specific period if borrowers are unable to make the \nscheduled loan payments for reasons including temporary financial hardship. B orrowers are \nliable for the interest that accrues on loan s during the forbearance period. Forbearance is \ngranted at banks’ discretion. Private student loans with repayment terms of 10 years or greater may have no more than 12 months of payment forbearance over the loans’ terms. \nBanks should establish a lesser limit for loans with terms of less than 10 years. Banks should consider grant ing forbearances for private student loans in one- or two -month \nincrements, with three - to six -month forbearance terms granted only in exceptional \n \n64 Refer to OCC, “Agencies Encourage Lenders to Work With Student Loan Borrowers,” news release 2013 -\n118, July 25, 2013. Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 35 Student Lending circumstances. There should be a 12-month period of positive payment performance before \nborrowers are eligible for subsequent forbearance. The two types of forbearance that banks \nshould consider as possible remedies for short- term borrower hardship are extended grace \nand extensions. Both forbearance actions are consistent with e xisting OCC guidance. \n \n• Extended grace is the period immediately after the grace period during which borrowers \nexperiencing financial hardship are allowed an additional grace period of up to six \nmonths. Extended grace may be granted with appropriate documentation and gives borrowers a total of up to 12 months after graduation or withdrawal from school to obtain \nemployment (grace period plus extended grace period) and begin repayment.\n65 \nExaminers should assess whether banks contact borrowers to document and support the \nhardship requiring this forbearance option, establish borrowers ’ commitment to repay the \ndebt, and evaluate the reasonableness of borrowers ’ prospective repayment capacity after \nthe extended grace period. \n• Extension is a form of forbearance used to roll back the maturity of loan s by a specified \nnumber of months (e.g., one or two months). Accounts are shown to be current upon granting extensions. \n The extended grace period and all extensions should count toward the maximum lifetime allowable payment forbearance of no more than 12 months. The limits on extensions are calculated on a per -loan basis. Management should consider incremental approval of the \nextended grace period and document ongoing conversations with borrowers to determine if borrowers have established means to repay the debt. Banks should notify cosigners of the approval of any extended grace period or other payment forbearance. Examiners should assess whether bank practices that defer the start of the repayment period \nare well controlled, supported, and documented to prevent the inappropriate deferral of loss recognition in problem situ ations. Short- term forbearance for temporary hardship is typically \nnot considered a TDR. A determination , however, should be made if a TDR exists if the \nmodification is significant to the term, contractual balance , or other characteristics of the \nloan, and consistent with GAAP. \n \nMilitary Deferment and Forbearance \n In the case of an i n-school m ilitary d eferment , members of the military attending school \n(enrolled at least half time) and called into active duty\n66 or qualifying National Guard duty67 \nshould be all owed deferment in increments of 12 months (maximum of 36 months). \n \n65 CNBE Policy Guidance 2010- 2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000 -20—Application to \nPrivate Student Lending.” \n \n66 The term “ active duty” is defined in 10 USC 101(d)(1). Also refer to 10 USC 688 12301(a), 10 USC 688 \n12301(g), 10 USC 12302, and 10 USC 12304. \n \n67 Qualifying National Guard duty refers to activation, reassignment, and full -time duty in connection with war, \ncontingenc y operation, or national emergency. Refer to 10 USC 12301. The term “National Guard duty” is \ndefined in 10 USC 101(d)(1), 10 USC 101(d)(3), and 10 USC 101(d)(5). Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 36 Student Lending Examiners should assess whether banks review borrowers’ military status after each 12-\nmonth deferment term. \n \nFor borrowers who are out of school, in repayment status , and called into active duty or \nqualifying National Guard duty, banks may grant a similar 12 -month deferment (maximum \nof 36 months) on an exception basis recognizing the borrowers ’ reduced capacity to repay. \n For military deferment and forbearance, examiner s should verify whether bank management \n \n• checks active duty papers to confirm mobilization or call to active duty .\n68 \n• provides the borrower education and counseling that include disclosure of capitalization \nof interest and non-waiver of principal during forb earance to both borrower s and \ncosigners. \n• monitors and tracks military forbearance granted with appropriate internal controls, MIS, and quality assurance. \n \nAdditionally, banks must follow laws and regulations, including t he SCRA , that apply to \nservice members . This law provides various civil protections and rights to service members. \nAmong the protections is a 6 percent interest rate cap on pre- service debts\n69 and restrictions \non default judgments against members in active duty military service. The U.S. Department \nof Justice may pursue enforcement actions for SCRA claims against lenders through the agency’s Civil Rights Division. Similarly, the OCC may consider what supervisory response, \nincluding taking an enforcement action, is appropriate if one of its supervised banks violates the SCRA. \n \nLong-Term Hardship \n Banks should work with borrowers experiencing long-term financial hardship in a constructive way. For long-term hardships, banks may temporarily or permanently offer workout programs that include modification or restructure. Private student loans, however, should not be treated differently from other retail loans. T he terms of any workout programs \nshould be consistent with the nature of borrowers’ hardship, have sustainable payment requirements, and promote orderly, systematic repayment of amounts owed. Banks should structure workout terms based on borrowers ’ and cosigner s’ (if any) renewed willingness and \nability to repay the loan s. Banks should be cautioned against workouts that suspend \nrepayment for protracted periods without sufficient documentation of borrowers’ hardship or willingness and reasonably expected ability to repay. Workouts should be controlled in accordance with sound bank workout policies. \n \n68 Banks may review call to active duty beginning and end date or access the U.S. Department of Defense \ndatabase. \n \n69 Pursuant to 50 USC 3937 (SCRA), “M aximum Rate of Interest on Debts Incurred Before Military Service,” \nthe term “interest” includes service charges, renewal charges, fees, or any other charges (except bona fide \ninsurance) with respect to an obligation or liability . Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 37 Student Lending For long-term hardships, banks may temporarily or permanently reduce the interest rate to \nlower borro wers’ payments. Any temporary reduction in borrowers ’ interest rate s should \nprovide reasonable transitions back to the contract rate to avoid payment shock. Conversely, extensions of loan terms or allowing non-amortizing payments or balloon payments at maturity are generally not appropriate actions for long-term hardships because there has not \nbeen any demonstrated ability by borrowers to repay. \n In determining whether to criticize banks with troubled private student loans, examiners should consider whether banks have offered appropriate modifications to borrowers, including restructured loans that result in adverse credit classifications or TDR under GAAP. By the same token, potential or actual treatment as a TDR should not prevent banks from proactively wo rking with borrowers to restructure loans with reasonable modified terms. \nConsideration and evaluation of cosigners and guarantors should guide the decision and \nselection of the best borrower option. Any private student loan restructure should be \nsupported by a current, well-documented credit evaluation of borrowers ’ and cosigners ’ (if \nany) financial condition and prospects for repayment under the revised terms. Banks should evaluate whether restructured private student loan s should be reporte d as a \nTDR. Not all modifications of loan terms, however, automatically result in a TDR. For example, if the modified terms are consistent with market conditions an d representative of \nterms that borrowers could obtain in the open market given similar credit characteristics , the \nrestructured loan is not considered a TDR .\n70 \n For reporting purposes, a restructured loan is considered a TDR when banks, for economic or legal reasons related to borrower s’ financial difficulties, grant concession s to borrowers in \nmodifying or renewing loans that the banks would not otherwise consider. Modifications of loan terms, such as extension s of the maturity date or reductions of the stated interest rate \nlower than the current market rate for new debt with similar risk, a re considered concessions \nand qualify as a restructuring under GAAP . Private student loans that have undergone TDRs \nin compliance with their modified terms should be reported as restructured loans in s chedule \nRC-C, part I, m emorandum item 1 , of the call report. \n Additionally, banks should evaluate whether accrual of interest remains appropriate for \nprivate student loan TDRs. Non-accrual reporting status for individual private student loan s \nis not specific ally required, but banks should take steps to ensure that the net income is not \nmaterially overstated. \n Guidance on reporting TDRs, including characteristics of modifications, is included in the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council ( FFIEC ) call report instructions and OCC \nBulletin 2012-10, “Troubled Debt Restructurings: Supervisory Guidance on Accounting and Reporting Requirements.” \n \n70 Bank Accounting Advisory Series , Topic 2A, question 1, September 2015. Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 38 Student Lending Examination Considerations \n \nStandards, p olicies, and p rocedures: When examining banks’ student lending workout \nprograms , examiners should understand the different workout arrangements and determine if \nbanks have prudent workout standards and eligibility criteria that control the use of and limit the number and frequency of forbearances, extensions, deferments, and modifications. The standards should prohibit any additional advances to finance unpaid interest and fees. Examiner s should assess whether banks have \n \n• standards, policies , and procedures that determine borrowers’ financial condition and \noverall capacity to repay through evaluation of income, employment, and other debts. \n• approval and reporting requirements. \n• program eligibility criteria tailored toward borrower s’ financial difficulty , including \ntemporary, short- term, or long- term difficulty . \n \nExaminer s should assess bank practices by (1) reviewing the analysis that supports the \nbanks’ decision to offer workout arrangements, and (2) evaluat ing whether banks adhere to \ntheir standards, policies , and procedures. E xaminer s should evaluate whether banks consider \nthe nature of borrower hardship and whether there is a reasonable basis to support repayment in the future. E xaminer s should sample several accounts to ensure that bank workout \npractices adhere to bank policy and that bank practices and policy are consistent with OCC \nguidance. \n Documentation and MIS : Banks’ decision s to grant deferment, forbearance, extension, \nmodification , or any other workout arrangement should be supported in the banks’ MIS. \nBank documentation should show that there was communication between the borrowers and the banks and that borrowers have the ability to repay the loan s. Examiners should review \nbank MIS and evaluate if banks have adequate MIS that identify and document any private student loan s placed in workout programs, including the number of times such action has \nbeen taken. \n Management oversight: There are risks in lax management supervision of workout \nprograms, including accumulation of problem accounts and understatement of portfolio delinquencies, charge -offs, and provisions. Banks should control and manage the volume and \ncomplexity of workout programs including following regulatory reporting and GAAP requirements. Banks should have an a llowance for loan and l ease l osses (ALLL) \nmethodology that is consistent with GA AP and recognizes credit losses in a timely manner \nthrough provisions and charge- offs. \n \nManagement should monitor and track the volume and performance of loans that have been placed in workout arrangements and measure the effectiveness of program s over tim e (e.g. , \n Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 39 Student Lending percentage of accounts that cure and charge off). The outcome should justify the practice. For \nworkout program s to be effective, banks may consider \n \n• tracking the 13 -month rolling volume of loans (number and dollar amounts) that were \nplaced into deferment, extension, forbearance, etc. , by month and monitoring this long \nterm (e.g., last three years). \n• monitoring performance for each deferment or forbearance since the deferment or \nforbearance arrangement ended. \n• tracking historical performance by repayment vintage and even grouping this by accounts \nthat received different types of workout since entering repayment. \n• monitoring average credit score of accounts in forbearance or repayment (dollar \nweighted) and comparing this with the average credit sco re for new volume. \n \nConsolidation and Refinance \n \nSome banks offer consolidation and refinance loans to borrowers who wish to simplify and streamline their repayment efforts. Consolidation allows borrowers to combine private student loans into single fixed -rate consolidation loans (or variable rate, if preferred), thus \nproviding single due dates and billing statements. If primary borrowers ’ credit profile s have \nimproved significantly, the primary borrowers may qualify for better rate s and may remove \nthe cosi gners (if any) from individual loans. Consolidation and refinance may be used to \nswitch lenders and enable borrowers to shop for the best possible loan term and pricing. Banks should exercise caution when offering consolidation of both federal and private student loans. B orrowers who refinance federal student loan s into private student loan s may \nlose favorable benefits from the original federal student loan s (e.g., Perkins loan subsidized \ninterest and loan forgiveness). Banks may consider help ing borrowers determine if \nconsolidation provides the expected benefit. \n In general, both federal and private student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Still, in determining whether student loan s are protected against discharge (pursuant to \n11 USC 523(a)(8)(B)), banks should consider whether the loans meet the definition of \n“qualified education loan.”\n71 The student loan debt should be incurred within “a reasonable \nperiod”72 with the debt attributable to education furnished during a period in which the \nborrowers were eligible students. \n \nRecoveries \n Recoveries are collection activities after account s are charged off. Student loans are rarely \npermitted to be discharged in bankruptcy, which allows lenders to pursue recoveries from borrowers for longer periods if banks seek and obtain court judgments against borrowers. \n \n71 A bankruptcy discharge exception is applied to qualified education loans in 11 USC 523(a)(8)(B), \n“Exceptions to Discharge.” \n \n72 The term “reasonable period” is defined in 26 CFR 1.221- 1(e)(3)(ii), “Deduction for Interest Paid on \nQualified Education Loans After December 31, 2001.” Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 40 Student Lending Similar with other retail loan products, recovery a ctivities for private student loans are \ngenerally conducted internally and may be outsourced to collection agencies after several \nmonths. Collection agencies receive a percentage of the dollars collected, and the percentage \nvaries based on whether the agency is the primary (the first agency to work the accounts), secondary, or tertiary collector. The primary agency generally collect s the lowest percentage, \nand the tertiary agency collects the highest percentage. \n Some of the factors that may affect the recovery rate are \n \n• previous collection efforts. \n• depth and experi ence of staff . \n• adequacy of systems and controls. \n• use of technology. \n \nWhen the bank select s an agenc y with which the bank will outsource accounts, the bank \nshould perform appropriate due diligence to ensure that the agency is, among other things, properly licensed and bonded. The bank should have systems to monitor the agency \ncontinuously to ensure the agenc y is operating in a prudent manner. Bank management \nshould follow the guidance outlined in OCC Bulletin 2013-29, “ Third -Party Relationships: \nRisk Management Guidance ,” as the bank work s with third parties to collect accounts. \n \nAllowance and Capital Treatment \n For performing private student loans, bank management should establish appropriate ALLL \nlevels that consider the credit quality of the portfolio s and conditions that affect \ncollectability. Most banks provide for at least one year of projected losses for their consumer portfolios, though the coverage period may be shorter or longer based on portfolio characteristics and performance. If the methodology and assumptions used are sound, the \nanalysis of the credit quality of the portfolio s and conditions for collectability determines the \nappropriate level and coverage of ALLL. Banks that engage in private student lending activities must comply with the OCC’s risk -based capital and leverage ratio requirements that \napply to those activities. \n All private student loans whose terms have been modified in a TDR should be evaluated for \nimpairment under Accounting Standards Codification Topic 310-10. Private student loans that have been modified in a TDR are impaired when , based on analysis of current \ninformation and events, it is probable that the bank will be unable to collect all amounts due (i.e., both principal and interest) according to the contractual terms of the original loan agreement s. When the review of impaired private student loans confirms that a specific \nrestructured loan is uncollectable, the amount that is uncollectable should be charged off. Banks with federal guaranteed student loan portfolios on their balance sheet s should account \nfor the portion of the loans not covered by the guarantee in the banks’ ALLL and regulatory capital. When government-guaranteed loans become 120 days past due, a dollar- for-dollar \nreserve should be established for the unguaranteed portion and reported accurately for call report and financial reporting purposes. For the purposes of capital, the guaranteed portion of Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 41 Student Lending federal student loan s is subject to a risk weight of 20 percent as a conditional guarantee of the \nU.S. government while the remaining unguaranteed 0 percent to 3 percent should be risk \nweighted at 100 percent. Private student loan s that are 90 days past due have a general risk \nweight of 150 percent.73 \n For more information on allowance, refer to OCC Bulletin 2006- 47, “Allowance for Loan \nand Lease Losses (ALLL): Guidance and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on the ALLL, ” and the OCC’s Bank Accounting Advisory Series . \n \nRehabilitated Federal Student Loans \n Bank participation in the student lending industry is not simply confined to the “originate and hold” model. In the past few years, some community banks found new opportunities by purchasing pools (“buy and hold”) of student loans in the Federal Rehabilitation Student Loan Program. The program is made up of fed eral student loans with borrowers who \npreviously defaulted but have brought the loans current with nine consecutive payments. Federal student loans generally fall into default after borrower s miss 270 days of loan \npayments (if payments are due monthly) or 330 days of loan payments (if payments are due less frequently) .\n74 The Education Department offers a federal student loan rehabilitation \nprogram to help borrowers bring education loans out of default through affordable payments. Rehabilitation is a one -time opportunity to remove a federal student loan default from a \nborrower’s credit history and to regain student aid eligibility. To rehabilitate a federal student loan, the borrower must make nine on- time,\n75 full monthly payme nts to the guarantor or its \ncontracted vendor during a period of 10 consecutive months. Payments must be made voluntarily by the borrower and must be equal to or greater than the amount determined to be reasonable and affordable. The definition of “voluntary” in this context excludes payments made by garnishment or other offsets. After the borrower makes nine of 10 consecutive payments and applies for and receives “ rehabilitation ,” the borrower will no longer be \nconsidered in default. A rehabilitated loan retains the same interest rate and deferment provisions that were \napplicable when the loan was first disbursed and keeps repayment terms and all other benefits applicable to other federal student loans. The borrower, however, regains eligibility \nfor deferment only to the extent that he or she has not already exhausted those deferment privileges before the initial default. For example, a borrower who was initially eligible for 24 months of unemployment deferment, and who used 12 months of that eligibility before his or her default, would be eligible to defer the rehabilitated loan for only 12 months due to any future unemployment status. \n \n73 Refer to 12 CFR 3, subpart D (12 CFR 3.30– 3.63), “Risk -Weighted Assets –Standardized Approach.” The \nOCC adopted the revised capital rules as final on July 9, 2013 (78 Fed. Reg. 62018 [October 11, 2013]). \n \n74 Refer to 34 CFR 682.200(b), “Definitions.” \n \n75 The term “on -time payment” is defined as payments within 20 days of the due date for FFELP and Direct \nLoan Program loans and 15 days for Perkins loans. Introduction > Risk Rating and Examiner Guidance \nComptroller’s Handbook 42 Student Lending Once loan s are redeemed, they are removed from collections and either returned to the \norigi nal federal student loan servicer s or purchased by eligible lending institutions. \nRehabilitation of FFELP loans usually requires that the loans be sold to lenders after the \nborrowers complete the steps required to rehabilitate the loan s. Community banks th at buy \nthese pools of loans generally receive a 2 percent to 3 percent discount and use third parties \nfor servicing and administration. This new business is attractive to community banks because the government guarantees 97 percent to 100 percent of the pr incipal of each loan . \n Rehabilitated FFELP loan pools are expected to have a higher net loss rate compared with pools of non- rehabilitated FFELP loans because, although the rehabilitated loans benefit \nfrom the same degree of federal guarantee, they are expected to default at a significantly higher rate than non-rehabilitated loans. Bank m anagement should ensure that the bank is \nindemnified from any loan servicer errors and can adequately manage the risks , such as third -\nparty, liquidity, interest rate, compliance, and reputation risk. Examiners should assess whether banks that buy these pools have a thorough understanding \nof the risks associated with the portfolios. To most community banks, engaging in rehabilitated FFELP is a new activity. Community bank examiners should closely monitor how effectively banks manage this program. Examination Procedures > Scope \nComptroller’s Handbook 43 Student Lending Examination Procedures \n \nThis booklet contains expanded procedures for examining specialized activities or specific products or services that warrant extra attention beyond the core assessment contained in the “Community Bank Supervision,” “Large Bank Supervision,” and “Federal Br anches and \nAgencies Supervision” booklets of the Comptroller’s Handbook . Examiners determine which \nexpanded procedures to use, if any, during examination planning or after drawing preliminary conclusions during the core assessment. \nScope \n These procedures are designed to help examiners tailor the examination to each bank and determine the scope of the student lending examination. This determination should consider work performed by internal and external auditors and other independent risk control functions and by other examiners on related areas. Examiners need to perform only those objectives and steps that are relevant to the scope of the examination as determined by the following objective. Seldom will every objective or step of the expanded procedures b e \nnecessary. \n The scope of student lending supervisory activities depends on the examiner’s knowledge of those activities, the amount of total and product exposure, and the amount of risk posed to the bank’s earnings and capital. This booklet provides t wo sets of procedures: primary and supplemental. \n The “ Primary Examination Procedures” section in this booklet discusses the steps necessary \nfor a comprehensive student lending examination in smaller or less complex operations and serves as the base student lending procedures for larger or more complex operations. The “Supplemental Examination Procedures” section in this booklet discusses when \nexaminers should expand the scope of the examination . For example, it may be necessary to \nsupplement primary procedures when the bank offers new or significantly changed products, when a particular concern exists, or when examining larger, more complex operations. The \nsupplemental examination procedures are grouped by functional areas. Examiners are encouraged to refer to other Comptroller’s Handbook booklets, including the following: \n \n• “Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses” \n• “Community Bank Supervision” \n• “Concentrations of Credit” \n• “Internal and External Audits” \n• “Internal Control” \n• “Large Bank Supervision” \n• “Loan Portfo lio Management” \n• “Rating Credit Risk” Examination Procedures > Scope \nComptroller’s Handbook 44 Student Lending In connection with evaluating compliance with applicable laws, e xaminers are also \nencouraged to refer to appropriate booklets in the Consumer Compliance series of the \nComptroller’s Handbook, such as the “Truth in Lending Act,” “Other Consumer Protection \nLaws and Regulations,” and “Fair Lending” booklets. Based on the facts and circumstances \nof each bank, examiners should select the appropriate expanded procedures, internal control \nquestionnaire (ICQ) , or verification procedures to supplement the minimum procedures. \n While reviewing student lending activities, examiners should remain alert for lending practices and product terms that could indicate discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, or predato ry issues. \n \nObjective: To determine the scope of the examination of student lending and identify examination \nobjectives and activities necessary to meet the bank’s supervisory strategy needs . \n 1. Review the following sources of information and note any previously identified problems related to student lending that require follow-up: \n \n• Supervisory strategy \n• Examiner -in-charge’s (EIC) scope memorandum \n• The OCC’s information system \n• Previous reports of examination (ROE) and work papers \n• Internal and external audit rep orts and work papers, including Education \nDepartment’s lender servicer review report \n• Bank management’s responses to previous ROEs and audit reports \n• Borrower complaints and litigation \n 2. Obtain the results of the Uniform Bank Performance Report and the OCC’s Canary \nbenchmark report . \n 3. Obtain and review the policies, procedures, and reports bank management uses to supervise student lending, including internal risk assessments. \n 4. In discussions with bank management, determine if there have been any significant changes (for example, in policies, processes, personnel, control systems, products, \nvolumes, markets, and geographies) since the previous examination of student lending. \n \n5. Based on an analysis of information obtained in the previous steps, as well as EIC input, \ndetermine the scope and objectives of the student lending examination. \n 6. In preparing for the student lending examination, write a request letter as directed by the EIC (refer to this booklet’s appendix B, “Sample Request Letter”). \n 7. Select from the following primary and supplementary examination procedures the necessary steps to meet examination objectives and the supervisory strategy . \n Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 45 Student Lending Primary Examination Procedures \n \nThe primary examination procedures provide the steps necessary for a comprehensive \nstudent lending examination in smaller or less complex operations and serve as the base \nstudent lending procedures for larger or more complex operations. The procedures include \nin-depth portfolio analysis and testing to promote examiners’ assessments of the quantity, \naggregate level, and direction of credit risk. Note: If the National Credit Tool is available, examiners are encouraged to use the standard \nretail reports and the tool’s other capabilities (i.e., custom reports and sampling) to assist in the student lending examination procedures. \nObjective: To a ssess the level of risk, evaluate the quality of risk management, and determine the \naggregate level and direction of risk of the bank’s student lending activities. 1. Review the scope, conclusions, and work papers from previous supervisory activities. Determine the adequacy and timeliness of management’s response to the issues identified and any findings or issues requiring follow-up. \n 2. Review relevant reports issued by internal and external audit, quality assurance, loan review, risk management, and compliance management since the previous supervisory activity. Determine the adequacy and timeliness of management’s responses to the issues \nidentified and any findings or issues requiring follow-up. Request work papers, if warranted. \n 3. Review the minutes of student lending- related management and board meetings \nconducted since the prev ious supervisory activity. \n 4. Obtain copies of complaints filed with the OCC (complaints reported to the Customer Assistance Group) and the CFPB (using the Consumer Complaint Database), and bank \nconsumer complaint logs. Evaluate the information for significant issues and trends. \n \nNote: Complaints serve as a valuable early warning indicator for compliance, credit, and \noperational issues, including discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, and predatory practices. \n 5. Determine whether there is any litigation, either filed or anticipated, associated with student lending activities and the expected cost or other implications. \n 6. Develop an initial assessment of the quality and performance of the student lending portfolio and product segments using portfolio reports, risk management analyses, and the Uniform Bank Performance Reports. Consider \n \n• growth. \n• portfolio mix and changes. Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 46 Student Lending • significance of the portfolio and each of the products in terms of total loans, total \nassets, and capital. \n• credit performance. \n• contribution to earnings and income composition (e.g., interest and fees). \n \nIf the bank securitizes assets, analyze data on a managed basis. Coordinate findings and \nconclusions with the examiner(s) assigned to review securitizations throughout the examination. \n 7. Discuss with management any changes made since the previous supervisory activity or \nplanned for student lending products and operations, including \n \n• growth overall and in individual products. \n• portfolio product mix. \n• off-balance -sheet retail credit activities (e.g., securitization activities). \n• new products. \n• terms on existing products. \n• marketing or acquisition channels (e.g., direct mail, telemarketing, Internet, and third -\nparty originators). \n• expansion into new market and trade areas. \n• new or expanded third -party loan generation or servicing arrangements. \n• underwriting, risk selection criteria, and portfolio quality. \n• monitoring and risk management processes. \n• models used to underwrite or manage the portfolio, if any. \n• retail loan systems, including underwr iting, servicing, and collection platforms. \n \nIt is important to understand how management assesses the effects of changes on profitability and risk profile and how management incorporates the effects of changes into the planning and risk management process es. \n \nDiscuss management’s perception of the competition and whether the bank can be successful in its market without changes. Determine the extent to which the changes made or proposed were in response to the competitive environment and the reasonableness of and analytical support for those changes. \n 8. Evaluate student lending management and the planning process. Specifically , \n \n• determine whether student lending objectives are consistent with the bank’s strategic \nplan and whether the objectives are reasonable in light of the bank’s resources, \nexpertise, capital support, product offerings, and competitive environment. \n• determine whether the student lending marketing plans and budgets are consistent with the retail credit objectives and the bank’s strategic plan. \n• evaluate the adequacy of the student lending planning process ( internal limits, \ngrowth, financial, and product-related), including the adequacy and timeliness of revisions when warranted by portfolio performance and new developments. Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 47 Student Lending • determine management’s risk appetite with respect to risk and return objectives (e.g., \nreturn on assets, return on equity, or return on investment) or credit performance \nhurdles (e.g., delinquency, credit loss, or risk score tolerances). \n• assess the qualifications, expertise, an d staffing levels of management and staff in \nview of existing and planned student lending activities. \n 9. Review and assess the adequacy of the bank’s policies, procedures, and practices. Specifically , \n \n• determine whether the board of directors approves the st udent loan policies at \ninception and includes those policies in its annual policy reviews thereafter. \n• identify significant changes in underwriting criteria and terms. Determine \n– the effect of those changes on the portfolio and its performance. \n– whether underwriting policies provide appropriate guidance on assessing both the borrower ’s and the cosigner ’s capacity to repay the loan . \n– that capacity to repay includes consideration of income, financial resources, and \ndebt service obligations. \n• if the bank uses credit scoring models (e.g., bureau, pooled, or custom), \n– determine how the bank ensures that the model is appropriate for the target \npopulation and product offering. \n– assess the reasonableness of the process used to establish cutoffs and determine whether management changed the cutoffs between examinations and the implications for portfolio quality and performance. \n– determine whether the policy provides for model monitoring and validation. \n• determine how policies and policy changes are communicated to staff, and assess the \nadequacy of the process. \n• evaluate the bank’s process for establishing policy exception criteria and limits , and \nfor monitoring and approving underwriting policy exceptions (e.g., underwriting \nstandards, loan terms, score overrides, and income documentation). \n• determine the control processes used to track and monitor policy adherence (e.g., \nquality assurance, MIS reports, loan review, and audit), and assess the adequacy of those processes. \n• if the bank uses third parties for such services as loan origination or collection, \ndetermine \n– how policies are communicated to those entities. \n– the adequacy of the processes for monitoring and reporting policy adherence and performance. \n• determine whether the bank’s policies and procedures, including those for third \npartie s, provide adequate guidance to avoid discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, \npredatory, and abusive lending practices\n76 (e.g., misleading disclosures). \n \n \n76 For more information, refer to the “Fair Lending” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook; OCC Advisory \nLetters 2002- 3, “Guidance on Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices,” and 2003 -2, “Guidelines for National \nBanks to Guard Against Predatory and Abusive Lending Practices”; and OCC Bulletin 2014 -42, “Interagency \nGuidance Regarding Unfair or Deceptive Credit Practices.” Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 48 Student Lending 10. Evaluate the condition and risk profile of the portfolio and individual products by \nreviewing historical trends and current levels of key performance indicators , such as loan \nbalances, delinquencies, losses, recoveries, and profitability. Focus on dollar balance percentages but also consider percentages of numbers of accounts. Review performance indicators for \n \n• major products, sub-products, portfolio segments, acquisition channels, and acquired \nportfolios. \n• third-party originators. \n• internal performance indicator hurdles and metrics. Compare actual performance indicators with internally established objectives. \n• industry and peers, as available (e.g., industry organization, rating agency, and \nsecuritization research). Compare industry indicators with bank performance. \n \nIn addition to coincident analysis,\n77 consider performing vintage analysis,78 especial ly if \nunderwriting criteria, loan terms, or economic conditions have changed, and if the \nportfolio exhibits significant growth. If available and well maintained, the bank’s \nchronology log79 should prove useful in determining the causes of variances. \n 11. Review new account application volumes, approval rates, and booking rates to assess \nportfolio growth. Review new account metrics to determine the composition and quality of accounts currently being booked. Compare the quality of recent account bookings with \nthat of accounts booked in the past. Metrics evaluated should include credit score \ndistributions (if used), price tiers, payment- to-income ratios , debt- to-income ratios, \ngeographic distribution, override volume, and credit policy exceptions. \n \n12. Evaluate the expected performance of the portfolio and the individual products through analysis of management reports, portfolio segmentation, and discussions with management. Specifically, review \n \n• score distributions and trends for accounts over time, evaluating scores at application (e.g., application score and bureau score), refreshed bureau scores, and behavior scores. \n• delinquencies and losses by credit score range for each major scoring model and \ndetermine whether there has been any deterioration of the good- to-bad odd s. \n• loan growth sources (e.g., branch, region, loan officer, and product channel, such as direct -to-consumer, school channel, telemarketing, direct mail, or Internet), and \ndifferences in performance by source. \n \n77 Coincident analysis relies on end -of-period reported performance, e.g., delinquencies or losses in relation to \ntotal outstandings of the same date. \n \n78 Vintage analysis groups loans by origination (vintage) for analysis purposes. Performance trends are tracked \nfor each vintage and compared with other vintages of similar age (time on book). \n \n79 The chronology log is a sequential record of internal and external events relevant to the credit function. Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 49 Student Lending • levels and trends of policy documentation excep tions, and the comparison of \nperformance of accounts with exceptions versus overall portfolio. \n• volumes and trends of first and early payment defaults. \n• management’s loss forecasts. \n \n13. Review collection department reports and activities to determine the implications for credit quality. \n \nNote: Several of the procedures already performed reflect collections activities (e.g., \nreview of delinquencies and losses ). \n \n• Review roll rate\n80 reports overall and by product; evaluate trends; and, if peer group \nperformance is available, compare roll rates. R efer to appendix D of this booklet for \nmore information on roll rates. \n• Review criteria, volume, performance, and trends for forbearance and other workout \nprograms as well as for deferment s, extensions, and restructures. \n• Determine the reasonableness of the bank’s collection strategies and the adequacy \nand timeliness of the processes for making revisions. \n• Review the loss forecasting process and determine whether it is reasonable and reliable. \n \n14. Assess the adequacy of MIS and reports used to provide management with the necessary \ninformation to monitor and manage all aspects of student lending. Determine whether \n \n• adequate processes exist to ensure data integrity and report accuracy, and balances \nand trends included in management’s student lending reports reconcile with the bank’s general ledger and with t he call report. \n• various department reports are consistent, i.e., the reports show the same number s for \nthe same categories and time periods regardless of the unit generating the report. \n• descriptions of key management reports are maintained and updated. \n• reports are produced to track volume and performance by product, channel, and marketing initiative, and whether those reports support any test with implications for credit quality or performance (e.g., pricing, credit score cutoff, school, or program). \nThis reporting process should be fully operational before the bank offers new products or initiates tes ts to accurately monitor performance from inception. \n• MIS and reports are available to clearly track volumes, performance, and trends for \nall types of forbearance and workout programs as well as activities including \nextensions, deferments, restructures, and modifications. \n• reports are clearly labeled and dated. \n 15. Determine whether the amount of ALLL is appropriate and whether the method of calculating the allowance conforms with GAAP. Assess whether management routinely \nanalyzes the portfolio to identify insta nces when the performance of a product or segment \n \n80 Roll rates measure the movement of accounts and balances from one payment status to another (e.g., \npercentage of accounts or dollars that were current last month rolling to 30 days past due this month). Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 50 Student Lending of a portfolio (e.g., workout programs) varies significantly from the performance of the \noverall portfolio. Any variation in performance should be adequately incorporated into \nthe allowance analysis. Refer to the “ Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses” booklet of \nthe Comptroller’s Handbook for guidance and specifically consider \n \n• whether estimates and assumptions are documented and supported consistent with \nFFIEC guidance (OCC Bulletin 2001-37, “Policy Statement on Allowance for Loan \nand Lease Losses Methodologies and Documentation for Banks and Savings Institutions : ALLL Methodologies and Documentation”). \n• credit quality, including any changes to underwriting, account management, or \ncollections that coul d affect future performance and credit losses. \n• historical credit performance and trends (e.g., delinquency roll rates and flow- to-loss) \noverall, by product, and by vintage within products. \n• level, trends, and performance of higher-risk populations (e.g., for- profit institutions). \n• level, trends, and performance of cure or workout programs, including deferment, forbearance, extension, modification, and restructure. \n• charge -off practices and consistency with OCC Bulletin 2000-20, “Uniform Retail \nCredit Classific ation and Account Management Policy : Policy Implementation ,” and \nCNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000-\n20—Application to Private Student Lending.” \n• whether management provides for accrued interest and fees deemed unco llectible in \nthe allowance or in a separate reserve. \n• the effects of securitization activities, if applicable. \n• economic conditions and trends. \n 16. Validate the preliminary risk assessment conclusions by conducting on- site transaction \ntesting. The purpose of working these samples includes verifying adherence to bank \npolicies; determining whether the bank maintains adequate documentation of analysis and decisions; verifying whether MIS reports accurately capture exception information; and determining whether prac tices are inconsistent with bank policy or are not adequately \ndepicted in existing management reports. The sample selected should be sufficient in size \nto reach a supportable conclusion. \n \nExaminers conducting testing should remain alert for potential discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, and predatory lending. If weaknesses or concerns are found, consult the bank’s EIC or compliance examiner. \n \nFor each product being reviewed , \n \n• sample recently approved loans to assess adherence to underwriting policy. If the \nbank uses credit scoring, select two samples : one sample from loans not automatically \napproved (e.g., judgmental decision involved even if credit scoring is used as a tool) and one sample from loans automatically approved. \n• sample recent “override” l oans, i.e., exceptions to normal underwriting standards, to \nevaluate the adequacy and consistency of the judgmental decision process. Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 51 Student Lending • sample loans that were 60 days or more delinquent two months ago and that are now \ncurrent to determine whether the borrower cured the delinquency by making \npayments or whether the loan was extended or granted forbearance. If the latter, \ndetermine whether the action was consistent with existing bank policy and whether it \ncomplied with CNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC \nBulletin 2000-20—Application to Private Student Lending.” \n• sample loans that were recently extended, deferred, renewed, or rewritten for \ncompliance with bank policy and reasonableness. Compliance with bank policy \nshould be judged against the bank’s normal underwriting guidelines with respect to debt- to-income, amortization period, debt or payment limitations, and pricing. \n• sample recently charged -off loans and review the borrower, payment, and collection \nhistory to determine whethe r the actions taken pre -charge-off were reasonable or if \nthe practices simply had the effect of deferring losses. \n \nBased on the results of transactional testing and the severity of concerns identified, determine whether the sample should be expanded. ( Note : Refer to appendix A, \n“Transaction Testing,” in this booklet for additional testing suggestions.) \n 17. Complete the “ Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy” \nchecklist in appendix C of this booklet to determine the bank’s level of compliance with \nOCC Bulletin 2000-20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy: Policy Implementation .” \n 18. If the bank is involved in higher-risk student lending, regardless of whether formally designated as subprime, assess whether management realistically identifies the level of \nrisk assumed and that the allowance and capital provide sufficient support for the activity. \n \nIn addition, OCC Bulletin 1999-10, “Subprime Lending Activities,” and OCC Bul letin \n1999-15, “Subprime Lending: Risks and Rewards,” provide guidance on policies and procedures. If the bank has a targeted subprime program with volume exceeding 25 percent of tier 1 capital, review adherence to the requirements of OCC Bulletin 2001-6, “Expanded Guidance for Subprime Lending Programs.” \n 19. If the bank relies on third- party relationships for significant functions, review compliance \nwith OCC Bulletin 2013-29, “Third -Party Relationships: Risk Management Guidance.” \n 20. Determine the effectiveness of the loan review process for student lending. Determine the scope and frequency of the reviews and whether loan review provides a risk assessment of the quality of risk management and quantity of risk for student lending. \n \nNote: Refer to the “Conclusions” section in this booklet to complete the assessment and \nthe exam. \n 21. Review copies of the materials provided to the board of directors and relevant senior management committees to determine if they are aware of the condition of the student Examination Procedures > Primary Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 52 Student Lending loan portfolio. T hese persons should be apprised of significant decisions that affect the \nquality and performance of the portfolio. \n \n22. Fully document findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a memorandum for review and approval by the loan portfolio management examiner or the EIC. Reach a \nconclusion on the quality of risk management and the quantity, aggregate level, and \ndirection of risk, and include all necessary support. To accomplish these ends, complete the following procedures: \n \n• Determine whether further work needs to be completed in the student lending area to \nfully assess credit or other risks. If so, refer to the appropriate supplemental procedures. \n• Provide asset totals to the EIC. In addition to the delinquency- based classifications \noutlined in the FFIEC Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy, consider bankruptcies, workout programs, and any other segments that meet the classified definitions. \n• Provide student lending conclusions to the examiner responsible for assessing \nearnings and capital adequacy. \n• If the bank securitizes assets, provide conclusions and supporting information about \ncredit quality to the examiner assigned to review securitizations. \n• If significant violations of laws or regulations are noted, prepare write- ups for \ninclusion in the ROE. \n• Prepare a recommended supervisory strategy for the student lending area. \n• Document findings in OCC systems as appropriate. \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 53 Student Lending Supplemental Examination Procedures \n \nThe supplemental examination procedures provide the steps necessary to expand the scope of \nthe review. Examiners may need to follow these steps to supplement the primary procedures \nwhen the bank offers new or significantly changed products, when a particular concern \nexists , or when examining more complex operations. The supplemental examination \nprocedures are organized by functional areas. \n \nMarketing and Account Acquisition \n \nObjective: To d etermine whether student lending marketing activities are consistent with the \nbank’s business plans, strategic plans, and risk appetite , and that appropriate controls and \nsystems are in place before the bank rolls out new products or new- product marketing \ninitiatives. \n 1. Assess the structure and expertise of the marketing department, focusin g on management, \nkey personnel, and staffing adequacy. \n 2. Review the bank’s marketing plan and assess it for reasonableness given the bank’s strategic plan and objectives, level of expertise, capacity (operational and financial resources), market area, and competition. \n \n• Determine whether the bank bases its plan on internally or externally prepared market, economic, or profitability studies. If external studies are used , obtain and \nreview copies of those studies. \n• Review the process for developing and implement ing marketing plans, with particular \nattention to whether the appropriate functional areas (e.g., risk management, finance, operations, information technology, legal, and compliance) are involved throughout the process. \n• Assess the appropriateness of the data and assumptions used to develop marketing \nplans, in part through the review of MIS reports that track actual performance against \nmarketing plans. \n• Discuss with management the controls in place to monitor marketing plans and \nactivities. \n \nNote: Before implementing any marketing initiative, including the rollout of a new \nproduct or change to an existing product, management should review all marketing \nmaterials, consumer disclosures, product features, and terms to identify and address potential discrimina tory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, and predatory lending practices.\n81 \n \n• Discuss with management any significant changes made or planned to the bank’s \naccount acquisition, account management, and cross- selling strategies, including \nchanges in channels and the use of third part ies. \n \n81 For more information, refer to the “Fair Lending” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook and OCC Advisory \nLetter 2002- 3, “Guidance on Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices,” March 22, 2002. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 54 Student Lending 3. Assess new product development. Specifically, \n \n• discuss with management the new product development process. \n• determine whether there are written guidelines for what constitutes a new product. \n• review new product proposals and plans appr oved since the last examination. \n• determine whether the appropriate functional areas (e.g., risk management, finance, \noperations, information technology, legal, and compliance) are involved throughout the development process to ensure that associated risks are properly identified and controlled. Determine whether the constituents remain involved during implementation. \n• evaluate systems planning to determine whether MIS and reporting needs are \nadequately researched and developed before new products are rolled out. D etermine \nwhether the systems and reports are adequate to supervise and administer new \nproducts. \n• evaluate the adequacy of the review and approval processes for new products. \n• determine whether management, including appropriate legal and compliance \npersonnel, reviews marketing materials during product development and \nimplementation to avoid deceptive or misleading advertising, terms, and disclosures. \n• determine whether the planning process adequately identifies and addresses the risks, operational needs, and systems support associated with different solicitation methods \nand channels, including direct applications, school applications, loan- by-phone, and \nthe Internet. \n 4. Evaluate the adequacy of the bank’s testing process for new products, marketing campaigns , and other significant initiatives. Review the process to assess whether testing \n \n• is a required step for any new products or significant marketing and account \nmanagement initiatives. \n• is properly approved. Senior management should approve the testing plan and determine that the proposed test is consistent with the bank’s strategic plan and meets \nstrategic objectives. \n• requires clear descriptions of test objectives and methods (e.g., assumptions, test size, selection criteria, and duration) as well as key performance measurements and targets. \n• includes a strong test and control discipline. The test should include a clean holdout \ngroup and test groups that are not subject to any significant account management or \ncross -selling initiatives for the duration of the test. Strict test group design enables \nmanagement to draw more accurate performance conclusions. \n• is accorded an adequate period of time, sufficient to determine probable performance \nand to work through any operational or other issues. When the test involves a \nsignificant departure from existing bank products or practices, test duration should probably be longer. Tests generally should run at least six months and usually should run nine or 12 months. The time frame may vary depending on the product or practice being tested. \n• is supported by appropriate MIS and reporting before implementation. \n• requires a t horough and well-supported postmortem analysis in which results are \npresented to and approved by senior management and the board before full rollout. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 55 Student Lending 5. Determine whether management assesses how underwriting standards for the new \nproducts may affect credit ri sk and the bank’s risk profile. \n 6. Evaluate cross -selling strategies, including the criteria used to select accounts. \n 7. If the bank maintains a data warehouse, determine how it is used for marketing purposes and if it is capable of aggregating customer loan relationships. \n 8. Determine the adequacy and effectiveness of the bank’s controls regarding information sharing, for both affiliates and unrelated third parties. \n 9. Prepare profiles for each of the products offered. Address \n \n• product description, including any unique characteristics and a general overview of \nterms (including pricing), target market (credit quality and geographic), and \ndistribution channels. \n• changes in the product characteristics since the last examination. \n• volume and trends, discussing growth to date and planned. \n 10. Select at least one new product introduced since the previous supervisory activity to assess the bank’s planning process. Specifically, review \n \n• the planning documents and the final approved proposal. \n• tests and analys es conducted, including performance compared to expectations. \n• MIS tracking reports. \n• available risk management, quality assurance, and audit reviews. \n• any subsequent product modifications and the basis and documented support for those \nchanges. \n• management review and approval documentation. \n• information presented to the board of directors. \n \n11. Develop conclusions about whether marketing activities are consistent with the bank’s business plans, strategic plans, and risk appetite , and comply with applicable laws and \nregulations. Determine if appropriate controls and systems are in place before new products or marketing initiatives are rolled out. \n \nUnderwriting \n \nObjective: To a ssess the quality of the bank’s new student loans and any changes from past \nunderwriting; determine t he adequacy of and adherence to student lending policies and \nprocedures; determine compliance with applicable laws and regulations; and gain a thorough \nunderstanding of the processes employed in account origination. \n 1. Ascertain and evaluate the types of stu dent loans that the bank offers and evaluate the \nreasonableness of the following: Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 56 Student Lending \n• Loan products offered and planned. \n• Underwriting standards and terms. \n• Degree of innovation (e.g., new terms, products, and markets). \n• Markets served and economic conditions. \n• Competitive environment. \n• Volume and proportion of loan portfolio (managed and on book), by product. \n• Level of participation in high -risk student lending. \n• Types of marketing and account acquisition channels. \n• Historical and planned growth. \n• Securitization activities. \n \nNote: When evaluating lending activities, examiners should remain alert for practices and \nproduct terms that could indicate potentially discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, or \npredatory practices. \n 2. Review new account metrics to determine the composition and quality of accounts currently being booked and the adequacy of MIS used to track new loan volume. \nCompare the quality of recent bookings to the quality of accounts booked in the past. Metrics evaluated, by product, should include \n \n• applicat ion volume, and approval and booking rates. \n• distribution of credit scores, if used, by applications, approved and booked. \n• percentage of accounts with a cosigner. \n• composition of loans booked by school type (i.e., graduate school, four- year college, \ntechnical school, for- profit institution, etc.) . \n• price tiers and fees. \n• geographic distribution. \n• override volume. \n• credit policy exceptions. \n 3. Obtain an overview of the origination process and the steps involved. When describing the process in the work papers, document the following \n \n• Which aspects of the underwriting process are automated versus manual? \n• Use of credit scoring models (e.g., types of models, history of model use, monitoring, \nand validation). \n• Differences in the underwriting processes arising from the application channel (i.e., direct to consumer, telemarketing, Internet, and school), and the differences for \nunsolicited versus prescreened applications. \n 4. Determine how management evaluates underwriter performance, including MIS for monitoring underwriter performance, and transaction testing completed by the \nunderwriter manager for quality assurance. \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 57 Student Lending 5. If the bank uses credit scoring in the underwriting process, assess the mix of automated \nand judgmentally approved loans. Refer to the credit scoring steps in the “Risk \nManagement and Control Functions” section of the “Supplemental Examination Procedures.” \n 6. For banks that lend in multiple geographic areas or states, confirm that management \nperforms periodic bureau preference analyses to determine optimal credit bureaus for \ndifferent states or localities. \n 7. Obtain a copy of the bank’s lending policies and procedures. Assess the adequacy and soundness of the policies and procedures, focusing on the main criteria used in the decision -making process and, if applicable, the verification processes used to confirm \napplication and transaction information. Evaluate \n \n• permissible types of loans. \n• lending authority and limits, and the exception approval process. \n• limits on concentrations of credit (e.g., product and school type ). \n• credit underwriting criteria, including measurements of the borrower and cosigner capacity to repay the loan (e.g., debt- to-income and payment- to-income ratios) and \ntreatment of derogatory credit bureau items. \n• credit scorecard cutoffs and tolerances for overrides. \n• borrower credit grade definitions (e.g., A, B, and C). \n• repayment terms (e.g., duration, amortization schedule, and pricing). \n• exception and override processes, criteria, and tracking. \n 8. Determine whether the policies and procedures provide adequa te guidance to avoid \ndiscriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, and predatory lending practices. If weaknesses or concerns are found, consult the bank’s EIC or compliance examiner. \n \nNote: For additional information, refer to the “Fair Lending” booklet of the \nComptroller’s Handbook and OCC Advisory Letter 2002-3, “Guidance on Unfair or \nDeceptive Acts or Practices.” \n 9. Assess the adequacy of the process for changing underwriting standards. Review all changes in standards since the last examination, and determi ne their effect on the quality \nof the loan portfolio. \n \n• Review analyses and documentation supporting recent changes to underwriting \ncriteria and score cutoffs. \n• Discuss reasons for changes (if not readily apparent) with bank management and determine whether there has been a shift in the credit risk appetite. \n• Determine whether all affected functional areas provide input to underwriting \nchanges. \n• Verify that management maintains a chronology of significant changes to \nunderwriting standards. \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 58 Student Lending 10. Determine the adequacy of the bank’s verification procedures and verify that, at a \nminimum, residence, employment, income, and school certification are routinely \nconfirmed for borrowers. \n 11. Evaluate credit policy exception and scorecard override limits, tracking , and repo rting. \nDetermine whether \n \n• volumes conform to policy limits, and that those limits are reasonable. \n• management tracks the volumes and trends of policy exceptions (by type) and \noverrides separately and by reason code. \n• management tracks the performance (i.e., delinquencies and losses) of these accounts \nover time, by type, and compares the performance to that of the overall portfolio. \n• as warranted, management responds appropriately to the levels of overrides and \nexceptions, adjusting underwriting policies and ex ception limits or providing \nadditional underwriter training accordingly. \n• management appropriately identifies the effects of the levels of exceptions and \noverrides and the performance of affected accounts on the quantity and direction of credit risk. \n 12. Select and test appropriate loan samples to determine credit quality; to verify adherence \nto bank underwriting policies, including verification procedures; to assess the adequacy of analysis and decision documentation; to ensure compliance with laws and regulations; to determine that MIS reports accurately capture exception information; and to determine whether practices exist that are inconsistent with bank policy or that are not adequately depicted in existing management reports. If the underwriting is outsourced, obtain the bank’s on- site monitoring reports for third -party underwriting. The bank should be \nsampling and re-underwriting loans to ensure the third party is following the bank’s underwriting guidelines. For each significant product type, \n \n• sample recently approved loan s to assess adherence to underwriting policy and \napplicable laws and regulations. If the bank uses credit scoring, select two samples: one sample from loan s not automatically approved (e.g., judgmental decision \ninvolved even if credit scoring is used as a tool) and one sample from loan s \nautomatically approved. Ensure that your sample includes loan s originated from each \nsignificant marketing channel and, if warranted, consider expanding the sample to more thoroughly test specific channels. \n• sample recently approved loan s that represent exceptions to underwriting policy to \ndetermine whether credit decisions are consistent, whether the analysis and other support for them is adequate, and whether the exceptions are approved on a non-prohibited basis. \n \nUse the bank’s credit files, account origination systems, and MIS reports to create a worksheet to summarize information for the sample. The worksheet should be tailored to fit the product and the bank’s underwriting criteria but generally includes the following information \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 59 Student Lending – Account data: name, account number, origination date, employment information, \ntime at residence, cosigner. \n– Underwriting terms : credit score (bureau, pooled, or custom), debt- to-income, \npayment- to-income , interest rate, loan term, payment amount. \n– Underwriting policy exceptions and score overrides (indicate whether bank or examiner identified). \n \nIf prepared properly, the worksheet facilitates examiner analysis and provides a sound foundation for reaching conclusions about the adequacy of the bank’s policy and adherence to it. Note: Examiners should follow OCC internal policy in handling p ersonally \nidentifiable information. \n 13. Based on the results of the testing and the severity of the concerns identified, determine whether the samples should be expanded. Refer to appendix A for additional sample suggestions. \n 14. Develop conclusions on the quality of the bank’s new loans, any chang es from past \nunderwriting, the adequacy of and adherence to student lending policies and procedures, compliance with applicable laws and regulations, the processes employed in account origination, MIS for monitoring new loan volume, and implications for the risk profile of the loan portfolio. Clearly document all findings. \n \nLoan Servicing and Administration \n \nObjective: To assess the effectiveness of activities associated with student loan servicing and \nadministration ; determine whether student loan servicing and administrative activities are \nexecuted in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, board- approved strategy , and \nconsistency with guidance; and to e valuate whether student loan servicing and administrative \nactivities enhance performance o f existing, nondelinquent accounts or portfolios. \n 1. Determine whether the board of directors or its designated banking committee has adopted student lending policies that appropriately cover all facets of the servicing and \nadministration operation. \n 2. Determine whether the bank verifies the borrower’s in -school status. If so, assess the \nadequacy of the process, including the policies and procedures employed. \n 3. Review policies and procedures in place to ensure the accuracy and integrity of information furnished to consumer reporting agencies. \n 4. Evaluate the adequacy of the bank’s process for approving and communicating approval of private student loans. \n 5. Determine whether bank systems are capable of aggregating the entire loan relationship Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 60 Student Lending by customer (multiple lo an accounts by product and in total) for the purpose of customer-\nlevel account management. If so, determine the extent to which the bank uses that \ncapability. \n 6. Determine whether the bank provides both the borrower and cosigners with necessary information and disclosures during the application, approval, and closing process. \n 7. Assess the adequacy of the bank’s processes when the borrower is transitioning to repayment. \n 8. Determine whether the bank provides the borrower and cosigners with information associated with different repayment options before the loan becomes due or before \nrepayment begins. If so, evaluate the adequacy of the process, including the timing of the notification, information provided (i.e., online), and other tools and options provided to \nhelp the borrower manage repayment of the loan. \n 9. Assess the bank’s policies and procedures, internal controls, and training regarding identifying and following all repayment options. \n 10. Determine whether the bank has retained appropriate documentation of all benefits offered to the borrower and whether the bank has sufficient controls to ensure that rules on earned benefits are followed. \n 11. Determine whether the bank provides borrowers with periodic statements of the account. If so, examiners should review policies, procedures, and systems to assess the adequacy of statements that are provided to borrowers. \n 12. Determine whether the bank will renew, modify, or rewrite existing loans to nondelinquent customers. If so, evaluate the adequacy of the process, including the policies and procedures employed and the volume, trends, and subsequent performance of those loans. \n \nCollections \n \nObjective: To e valuate the effectiveness of the student lending collection function, including the \ncollection strategies and programs employed, to better assess the quality of the portfolio and the quantity and direction of credit risk. 1. Assess the structure, management, and staffing of the collections department. If not previously performed , \n \n• review the organization chart for the department and evaluate the quality and depth of \nthe staff based on the size and complexity of the operation. \n• discuss with senior management staffing plans for each major collection activity , such \nas early stage, late stage, fraud, and agency -management third -party collection, Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 61 Student Lending including how plans fit with department and bank objectives (e.g., growth and credit \nperformance projections). \n• review the experience of senior managers and supervisors. \n• assess the adequacy of the bank’s training program for collectors through discussions \nwith management. \n• assess the appropriateness and administration of the bank’s incentive pay program for collectors. Pay particular attention to possible negative ramifications of the plan, such \nas the potential to encourage protracted repayment plans, aggressive curing of accounts, or individual rather than team efforts. Determine whether the plan limits the total incentive pay that a collector can receive. \n• determine whether the board or senior management reviewed and approved the incentive pay program before implementation. \n 2. Assess the adequacy of the bank’s written collection policies and procedures. Determine whether they cover all significant collection activities and are consistent with OCC \nBulletin 2000-20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy: Policy Implementation ,” and CNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV) , “Policy \nInterpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000-20—Application to Private Student Lending.” Refer to \nthe checklist in appendix C of this booklet. \n \n• Verify that the bank’s policies prohibit the rebooking of accounts that are charged off \nfor anything other than bank error. \n• Determine whether the bank is considered a debt collector as defined by the FDCPA . \nIf so, ensure appropriate review at the next compliance examination. \n• Identify where management has implemented automated decisions (i.e., charge- off, \nextensions, forbearance) to be consistent with the OCC policy guidelines. \n \n3. Evaluat e the adequacy of the bank’s classification, nonaccrual, and charge- off practices \nand whether the practices comply with the bank’s written policies and procedures. \n \n• Discuss practices with both management and line personnel. Identify any \ninconsistencies with policies and procedures versus practices. Ensure examiners \nassisting with the collection review and conducting testing are aware of these inconsistencies. \n• Identify where management has implemented automated processes versus manual \nprocesses to comply wit h policies. Review the system settings to verify that the \nparameters correspond to those described in the bank’s policies and are consistent \nwith FFIEC policies. If not, discuss the differences with management and request \nappropriate corrective action. \n• Request management’s summary of classified student loans. Determine if the \nclassification practices are consistent with OCC Bulletin 2000-20. Private student loans should be classified substandard at 90 days past due and loss at 120 days past due. \n• Request management’s summary of nonaccrual student loans. If the bank does not place student loans on nonaccrual status , determine that the bank employs appropriate Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 62 Student Lending methods to ensure income is accurately measured (e.g., loss allowances for \nuncollectible fees and f inance charges). \n• Determine how accounts scheduled for charge -off are loaded into a charge-off queue \nor other system for loss. Specifically, determine whether losses are automatically or manually processed ; what circumstances, if any, will delay a charge-off; and when \nthe bank recognizes losses (i.e., daily, weekly, or monthly). \n• Request a report detailing student loans more than 120 days past due that have not \nbeen charged off. Review the report with management and determine why those \nbalances remain on the bank’s books and whether there are system or policy issues that need to be corrected. \n 4. Evaluate the adequacy of the bank’s policies and practices for payment posting and assessing late fees. \n \n• Review the payment posting procedures and practices and determine if payments are \npromptly posted. \n• Determine the conditions under which late fees are imposed\n82 and, if applicable, at \nwhat point the fees are suspended. \n• Determine the bank’s policy for collecting late fees (e.g., as part of the next regularly sched uled payment) and how unpaid late fees are accounted for, tracked, and \ncollected. \n• Determine whether the bank’s process for evaluating the ramifications of changes in late fee policies, including dollar amounts, is adequate before broad \nimplementation.\n83 \n• Assess whether the available MIS and reports provide the information necessary to \nevaluate the effect of late fees. Specifically, assess whether the information is \nsufficient to allow management to determine whether the fees have the desired effect on performance (i.e., improve on- time payments), whether late fees result in negative \namortization, and the extent to which late fees assessed are actually collected. \n• Ensure that the bank has established adequate loss allowance for accrued but \nuncollectible interest and fees, including late fees, in either the allowance or a \nseparate reserve. \n 5. Assess the appropriateness of management’s collection strategies. \n \n• Through discussions with management, determine how management develops \ncollection strategies, who is responsi ble, and how the success of the strategies is \nmeasured. \n• Determine what triggers strategy changes and who has authority to direct revisions. \n• Establish whether the bank uses scoring or any other predictive techniques to assist in \nthe collection of accounts. If so, determine \n \n82 For example, UDAP concerns could arise from a bank practice of assessing a late fee when the delinquency is \nonly at tributable to a late fee assessed on an earlier installment, and the payment is otherwise a full payment for \nthe applicable period and is paid on its due date or within an applicable grace period. \n \n83 12 CFR 7.4002(b) sets forth the criteria for national ba nk fees and charges. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 63 Student Lending – the scores or techniques used, how they are used, and whether they are internally \nor externally developed. \n– when the scores or techniques were last validated and by whom, and the results of \nthe validation. \n 6. If applicable, assess the adequac y of the bank’s use of collection strategies. \n \n• Identify the person or group responsible for strategy development. \n• Determine that the development process begins with a clear identification of strategy \nobjectives and relies on reasonable assumptions and complete and accurate MIS. \n• Determine that the bank’s controls provide for proper testing of strategies before \nmaking decisions to expand penetration. \n• Assess the monitoring process and determine whether the bank accumulates and \nanalyzes appropriate data to measure strategy success. \n• Determine that the bank maintains adequate documentation of the various strategies. \n 7. Determine whether the bank uses cure programs such as deferment, extension, forbearance, restructures and modifications, or settlement and forgiv eness. If so , \n \n• assess the adequacy of the policies and procedures used to administer the programs \nand consistency with OCC Bulletin 2000-20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification \nand Account Management Policy : Policy Implementation ,” and CNBE Policy \nGuidance 2010-2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000-20—Application to Private Student Lending.” \n• review and evaluate any test and analysis summaries completed before \nimplementation of new cure programs. \n• determine whether the bank’s programs appropriately address proper income \nrecognition for restructured loans. \n• evaluate the MIS and reporting used to monitor and analyze the performance of each program. Compare performance with forecasts , bank objectives, and risk appetite . In \naddition to repor ts listed in the bank’s collections procedure s, ensure that \nmanagement generates and reviews reports detailing \n– volume (balance and unit) trends for cure program accounts, by product, program, \nand vintage, and in total. \n– loss performance, by product, program, and vintage, and in total. \n– performance of the accounts 30, 90, 180, 270, 360, etc., days following the cure. \n– performance of accounts cured more than once, broken down by the number of times cured and tracked over time. \n– policy exceptions and the performan ce of those exceptions. \n• compare the performance of accounts in cure programs with the performance of those \nin the general student loan population using appropriate performance measures . \n• assess the current and potential impact of such programs on the bank’s reported \nperformance (asset quality) and profitability, including allowance and capital implications. \n 8. Review and determine the effectiveness of the bank’s skip tracing practices and Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 64 Student Lending procedures to track delinquent customers. \n \n• Ascertain what portion of the portfolio lacks current and correct telephone numbers \nand mailing addresses. \n• Evaluate the adequacy of the bank’s process for obtaining missing contact information. \n• Determine whether the bank has a process to exclude accounts without pertinent contact information from promotional initiatives and favorable account management \ntreatment. \n• If applicable, determine whether the bank appropriately monitors outside agencies used to skip- trace accounts. \n• Determine whether skip accounts are flagged for accelerated charge -off if attempts to \nlocate the borrower are unsuccessful. \n 9. Assess whether the bank’s automated systems for collecting delinquent accounts are adequate and discuss these systems with management. \n \n• Determine which technologies and processes the bank uses to collect accounts (e.g., \nautomated dialers, collection letters, statement messaging, and e -mail), how each is \nused, and the key reports generated to monitor performance. D etermine whether the \nreports provide sufficient data to allow management to make appropriate decisions. \n• If auto -dialing is used, determine how the system routes “no contact” accounts or \naccounts that collectors remove from the dialer because of a promise to pay or a \npayment arrangement. \n• Determine whether the systems generate a sufficient audit trail. \n• Determine whether managers, supervisors, and quality control staff have the ability to \nlisten to collector phone calls online. \n• Evaluate the adequacy of the bank’s contingency plans and determine whether the \nplans are tested regularly. \n 10. Asse ss the quality, accuracy, and completeness of MIS reports and other analyses used to \nmanage the collections process. \n \n• Evaluate the quality of MIS collection reports regularly provided to executive management and determine whether the reports provide adequate information, including comparisons with collection objectives and tolerances, for timely decision-making. \n• Determine the appropriateness and accuracy of key collection reports. Specifically \nreview \n– vintage and coincident delinquency and loss reports. \n– roll rate reports and migration -to-loss reports. \n– cure program reports, in total, by program and by collector. \n– pipeline reports that track the volume (number and dollar) of accounts entering \ncure programs, accounts awaiting extension, forbearance, and the actual performance of accounts in the various programs. \n– collector and strategy reports. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 65 Student Lending – productivity reports, including information such as call frequency , right- party \ncontact, promises made and kept, dollars collected, and staffing summaries. \n \nNote: If not re moved, not sufficient funds checks can affect several of the metrics \nabove. Management should have a method to identify, if not correct, the effects of not \nsufficient funds checks on the metrics. \n \n• Determine whether customer service or a department other than collections can \ninitiate collection activities, such as cure programs. If so, determine whether \nappropriate MIS are in place to monitor volumes and credit performance of accounts in collection activities initiated outside collections. \n 11. Determine what sy stem(s) the bank uses to recover charged-off accounts and deficiency \nbalances and whether they interface with the bank’s collection management system(s). If not, determine how the recovery unit gathers and uses information about previous collection activities. \n 12. Determine whether the bank uses outside agencies (including attorneys and attorney networks) to collect delinquent accounts or to recover losses. If so, \n \n• assess the bank’s due diligence process for selecting third -party collectors . \n• determine whether the bank’s legal counsel and compliance officer have reviewed the \ncontracts with and practices of third -party collectors. \n• evaluate any forward -flow contracts with collection agencies, including performance \ntolerances and termination requirements (important for remediation or severing the \ncontract in the event of poor performance). Forward -flow contracts provide agencies \nwith a set number of accounts at a determined frequency and help the bank forecast \nplacements. \n• determine the frequency and method of rotating accounts, including reasons supporting the method, between collection and recovery agencies and in-house collections, i.e., distinctions among primary, secondary, and tertiary. \n• review productivity and cost reports for each third party , and discuss with \nmanagement how the bank monitors the success of collectors and allocates workload \naccordingly. \n• evaluate the systems and controls used to supervise out-placed accounts, including \nactive reconcilements of amounts collected and fees disbursed to each third party. \n• review MIS used to monitor the performance of outside agencies. \n• evaluate the adequacy and frequency of the bank’s audits (on- site and remote, if \napplicable) of third -party collectors. \n• determine whether any sales of fully charged -off loans are consistent with OCC \nBulletin 2014-37, “Consumer Debt Sales: Risk Management Guidance.” \n \n13. Assess the bank’s recovery performance using historical results and industry averages, by product, as guidelines. \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 66 Student Lending • Determine whether the bank periodically sells charged -off accounts. If so, determine \nthe reasonableness of forecasts for recoveries . \n• Evaluate the bank’s recoveries in light of previous period losses. \n• Evaluate the accuracy of the recovery figures. If the bank charges accrued but \nuncollected interest and fees against income rather than the allowance, verify that \nrecoveries are reported accordingly (i.e., include principal only). \n• Assess the costs associated with the dollars recovered and explore trends. \n 14. Assess the appropriateness of the bank’s fraud policies and procedures. \n \n• Review the bank’s definition of fraud losses and ensure that it is reasonable and \nappropriately distinguishes fraud from credit losses. \n• Ascertain for consistency with the charge -off requirements of OCC Bulletin 2000-20, \n“Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy: Policy \nImplementation ” (90 days from discovery). \n• Confirm that fraud losses are recognized as operating expenses rather than charges to \nALLL. \n \n15. Review the adequacy of MIS reports pertaining to fraud . \n \n• Determine whether the information is sufficient to monitor fraud and the \neffectiveness of fraud controls, including the appropriate filing of suspicious activity \nreports. \n• Assess the levels and trends of fraud losses, by product, compared with industry \naverages and discuss any atypical findings with management. \n \n16. Assess the adequacy of internal and external audit, quality assurance, loan review, and risk management in the collections area, including scope, frequency, timing, report content, and independence. \n \n• Review relevant audit, quality assurance, loan review, and risk management reports. \n• Determine the adequacy and timeliness of management’s responses to the issues identified and any findings or issues requiring follow-up. If warranted based on the significance of the issues or concerns about the adequacy of the response or action taken, test corrective action. \n 17. Conduct transaction testing to verify your initial conclusions on the bank’s collection programs and activities. In addition to determining adherence to approved policies and procedures, determine whether the programs and activities result in an enduring positive change in credit risk or provide temporary relief. Verify that MIS reports accurately capture the activities and the subsequen t performance of the accounts (refer to appendix \nA for additional guidance). \n \n• Sample accounts that were at least 60 days delinquent in the month preceding the \nexamination and are now current to determine whether the customer cured the \ndelinquency or whethe r the account was cured artificially (e.g., extended grace or Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 67 Student Lending forbearance). Determine whether the action was consistent with existing bank policy \nand OCC Bulletin 2000- 20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account \nManagement Policy: Policy Implementation ,” and CNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2, \n“Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000-20–Application to Private Student Lending.” \n• Sample accounts from each of the primary collection areas (e.g., early -stage, late -\nstage, skip, or bankruptcy) to determine adh erence to policy. The sample helps an \nexaminer understand the collection process and strategies employed. ( Note: This \nsample is often best completed or supplemented by sitting with collectors as they work accounts.) \n• Sample loans from each of the following areas to assess compliance with the bank \npolicies for the programs and reasonableness of decisions: recent deferment, extended grace, extension, forbearance, restructures , and modification. Decisions should be \ncompared with the bank’s normal underwriting g uidelines on amortization period, \ndebt or repayment limitations, and pricing. \n• Sample charged -off accounts and review all activities that occurred before charge -off \nto determine whether the bank employs practices that result in loss deferral. \n• Sample identif ied fraud accounts and review all activities to determine adherence to \npolicy and timeliness of charge- off practices. \n 18. Develop conclusions regarding the effectiveness of the collection function, including the collection strategies and programs employed, and the implications for the quality of the \nportfolio and the quantity and direction of credit risk. \n \nRisk Management and Control Functions \n \nObjective: To e valuate the adequacy of the bank’s student lending processes for identifying, \nmeasuring, monitoring, and controlling risk by reviewing the effectiveness of risk \nmanagement and other control functions. 1. Assess the structure,\n84 management, and staffing of each of the control functions, \nincluding risk management, loan review, internal and external audit, quality assurance, and compliance review. \n \nNote: Compliance is a risk for student lending. While consumer compliance examiners \ngenerally assess the quality of the compliance review function, safety and soundness examiners should understand compliance-related roles, responsibilities, and coverage, as well as how compliance controls fit into the overall control plan. \n 2. Ascertain the roles , responsibilities , and reporting lines of the various control functions \nthrough discussions with senior management. \n \n \n84 Depending on the bank, risk management functions may be managed from different areas in the bank (i.e., \nsome from the line of business and others from the corporate offices). Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 68 Student Lending • Review the organization chart for each function and evaluate the quality and depth of \nstaff (including number of positions) based on the assigned role and the size and \ncomplexity of the operation. – Review the experience levels of senior managers and staff. \n– Determine whether employees are capable of evaluating the line of business activities. \n– Review management and staff turnover levels. \n• Discuss the structure and staffing plans, including known or anticipated gaps or \nvacancies, with senior management. \n• Review compensation plans to determine that performance measurements are appropriately targeted to risk identification and control objectives. \n• Determine whether organizational reporting lines create the necessary level of \nindependence. \n \nNote: If the management and staff of a control function lack the knowledge or capability \nto adequately review all or parts of student lending operations, management may need to consult or hire appropriate outside expertise. \n 3. Discuss with senior managers how they assess whether significant risks are appropriately \nmonitored by at least one control function and how they assess the effectiveness of each function. \n \n4. Determine whether the risk management function appropriately monitors, analyzes, and \ncontrols the bank’s credit risk. \n \n• Determine risk management’s recurring responsibilities and major projects, including status of projects, and assess the adequacy of those activities in light of the bank’s student lending risk profile, the products offered, and the complexity of the operation. \n• Determine whether credit risk decisions involve all key functional areas, including \nrisk management, marketing, finance, operations, compliance, legal, and information \ntechnology, either formally or informally. \n• Determine whether risk management is involved in tactical student lending decisions, \nsuch as program approvals, program renewals, new products, marketing campaigns, \nand annual financial planning. \n• Obtain descriptions of key management reports to determine the types and purposes \nof reports produced, report distribution, and frequency of preparation. \n• Obtain a sample of recent ad hoc or special studies or board reports produced by risk management to determine the types of analyses performed, the reasonableness of the \nscopes and methodologies used, and the accuracy of the conclusions drawn, including the adequacy of the support provided. \n• Determine what technologies and risk tools are deployed and risk management’s role \nin the management of those tools, including data warehouse, portfolio management \nsoftware, credit scoring, and risk models. \n• Determine whether market, competitive, legislative, and other external factors are considered in the risk management process. \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 69 Student Lending 5. Determine whether management considers consumer complaints and complaint \nresolution in the risk management process. Obtain copies of complaints filed with the \nOCC (complaints reported to the Customer Assistance Group) and the CFPB (using the \nConsumer Complaint Database), and bank consumer complaint logs and evaluate the information for significant issues and trends. Complaints often serve as a valuable early warning indicator for compliance, credit, and operational issues, including discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, and predatory practices. \n 6. Determine whether changes to practices and products, including new products and practices, are fully tested, analyzed, and supported before broad implementation. \n 7. Test the effecti veness of the bank’s risk management process for existing and new \nproducts, marketing and collection initiatives, and changes to risk appetite (e.g., initiating \nor changing credit criteria or adopting new scoring systems and technologies). Select at \nleast one significant new product or collections initiative (e.g., forbearance or modification) , and track it through all facets of the management process. \n \n• Planning : If tracking a new loan product, for example, determine how the bank \ndeveloped new underwriting standards (e.g., how did it analyze the applicability of the underwriting criteria and marketing strategies then in use and what was the basis of any projections?), and how did it derive new criteria or strategies (e.g., what were the key drivers for credit and revenue? ). \n• Execution: Evaluate the adequacy of the process employed to ensure that new criteria \nand changes were implemented as intended. This component is generally performed by some combination of information technology staff, product management, quality control, audit, and loan operations. \n• Measurement : Ascertain how adherence to standards is measured and how \nmanagement measures affect using back -end monitoring and analysis. Determine the \nkey measurements management uses to analyze the effectivenes s of its decisions \n(e.g., responder analyses, first or early payment default, vintage reporting for delinquencies and losses, risk-adjusted margin, and profit and loss) and the adequacy of back -testing analyses (comparison to targets, identification and an alysis of \nanomalies). \n• Adjustment: Determine how feedback results (lessons learned, opportunities \nidentified) are incorporated into the process as course corrections or adjustments. Assess the process for making adjustments as problems or unexpected perform ance \nresults are identified, and whether the process is both timely and appropriate. \n 8. Determine whether the bank has the data warehousing capabilities (i.e., the capacity to store and retrieve pertinent data) to support necessary monitoring, analytical, and forecasting activities. \n 9. Evaluate executive management’s monthly and quarterly report packages. Specifically , \n \n• determine whether the reports accurately and completely describe the state of the \nbank’s student lending business. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 70 Student Lending • evaluate whether reports adequately measure credit risk (e.g., score distributions and \nvintage reports), identify trends, describe significant variances, and present issues. \n(Note: Reports should allow management to assess whether student lending \noperations remain consistent with strategic objectives and within established risk, return, and credit performance tolerances. ) \n• determine whether reports clearly indicate analysis of performance results and trends \nrather than merely depict data. \n 10. Obtain feedback fro m other examiners assigned to the student lending examination \nregarding the adequacy of reports available. \n \nCredit Scoring Models \n Note: Refer to OCC Bulletins 1997-24, “Credit Scoring Models : Examiner Guidance,” and \n2011-12, “Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk Management,” for additional background and guidance in this area. \n 11. Assess the adequacy of the student loan scorecard management process , and determine \nthe effectiveness of the department or personnel responsible for scorecard and model development or procurement, implementation (including monitoring), and validation. \n \n• Obtain a model inventory to determine the models in use. The inventory should \ninclude \n– name of the model . \n– model description. \n– type (custom, generic, behavioral). \n– date developed . \n– source (name of the third -party or in -house modeler). \n– purpose (e.g., pricing, profitability, or collectability ). \n– date last validated and next scheduled validation date. \n– model rating from either the last validation or ongoing monitoring. \n– models under development, if any . \n– management contact for each model . \n• Determine whether scorecards are used for purposes consistent with the development \nprocess and populations. If not (e.g., applied to a different product or new geographic \narea), assess the ramifications and acceptability. \n• Review the most recent independent validation reports for key risk models and discuss the conclusions with risk management. \n• Discuss how management uses the models to target prospects, underwrite applications, and manage the portfolio. \n• Determ ine how management measures the ongoing performance and robustness of \nmodels (e.g., good and bad separation, bad rate analysis, and maximum delinquency \n[“ever bad”] distribution reports). \n• Review scorecard tracking reports to determine how well the models are performing. Select tracking reports for key models and determine whether model performance is stable or deteriorating, and how management compensates for deteriorating efficacy. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 71 Student Lending • Determine how cutoffs are established, reviewed, and adjusted. Review the most \nrecent cutoff analysis for key risk models. \n• Determine the bank’s score override policy, assess the adequacy of associated tracking, and review override volume and performance. Determine whether \nmanagement segments low -side overrides by reason and tracks delinquencies or \ndefaults by reason and override score bands, and assess the performance and trends. \n• Review chronology logs to determine changes in the credit criteria or risk profile and \nto explain shifts in the portfolio, including volume and performance. \n \n12. Select at least one key student loan credit risk scoring model and fully assess the adequacy of the model management process. \n \n• Review the original model documentation or scorecard manual, and assess management’s adherence to the modeler’s recommended scorecard maintenance routine. \n• Compare the population characteristics and the developmental sample performance \nby log odds ratio with the bank’s current experience. \n• Review model performance reports and assess the adequacy of management’s response to the issues or trends identified. Reports reviewed may include applicant \ndistribution, population stability, characteristic analysis (if indicated by a population shift), override tracking, and vintage delinquency and loss distribution reports. \n \nLoan Review \n 13. Asse ss the adequacy of the loan review process for student lending. Determine whether \n \n• the loan review’s scope includes providing a risk assessment of the quality of risk \nmanagement and quantity of risk for student lending in aggregate and by student loan program. \n• the scope includes appropriate testing for adherence to key credit policies and \nprocedures. \n• the scope includes appropriate reviews to assess compliance with applicable laws, \nregulations, and consistency with regulatory guidance. \n• the scope includes a review of the accuracy and adequacy of MIS reporting. \n• the frequency of reviews is acceptable based on the significance of the risks involved. \n• staffing levels and experience are commensurate with the complexity and risk in the \nstudent lending area. \n• loan review is independent from the production process. \n• loan review possesses sufficient authority and influence to correct deficiencies or \ncurb dangerous practices. \n \n14. Evaluate recent loan review reports for student lending. Determine whether \n \n• reports are issued in a timely manner following completion of the on -site work. \n• reports provide meaningful conclusions and accurately identify concerns. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 72 Student Lending • significant issues require management’s written response. \n• management initiates timely and appropriate corrective action. \n• issues identified and the status of corrective actions are tracked and reported to senior \nmanagement. \n \nNote: Weaknesses identified by examiners, but not identified by the loan review, may be evidence of deficiencies in loan review processes or staffing. \n \nQuality Control \n 15. Assess the adequacy of the quality control process for student lending. Determine whether \n \n• the process assesses ongoing compliance with key credit and operational policies and \nprocedures, and applicable laws and regulations for all primary areas, including \n– loan origination. \n– account management . \n– customer service. \n– collections . \n Note: Quality control processes should be established for all student lending activities \nand any third-party loan servicing and origination arrangements. \n• quality control tests the integrity and accuracy of MIS data for areas listed above. \n• the frequency of reviews is properly geared to the significance of the risk. \n• the testing and sample sizes are appropriate. \n• the quality control function possesses sufficient authority and influence to correct \ndeficiencies or curb dangerous practices. \n \n16. Review a sample of quality assurance ongoing testing worksheets and periodic summary reports (e.g., monthly summaries of testing conclusions). Determine whether \n \n• the reporting process allows for timely feedback to management. \n• worksheets and summary reports accurately identify concerns. \n• significant issues require management’s written response. \n• management initiates timely and appropriate corrective action. \n• issues identified and the status of corrective actions are tracked and reported to senior management. \n \nNote: Weaknesses identified by examiners, but not identified by the quality control function, may be evidence of deficiencies in quality control processes or staffing. \n 17. If the quality assurance function is not independent from the loan production process, determine whether internal audit or loan review tests quality assurance to ensure that management can rely on those findings. \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 73 Student Lending 18. If reviews and testing by the quality control area do not include significant risk areas, \ncommunicate findings to the EIC to determine whether it is appropriate to complete \ntransactional testing in areas not covered by quality control. \n \nInternal Audit \n 19. Assess the adequacy of internal audit for student lending. D etermine whether \n \n• the scope includes appropriate testing for adherence to key credit and operational \npolicies and procedures. \n• the frequency of reviews is properly geared to the significance of the risks. \n• internal audit is independent. \n• internal audit posses ses sufficient authority and influence to correct deficiencies or \ncurb dangerous practices. \n \nNote: Refer to the “Internal and External Audits” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook \nfor additional information. \n \n20. Review recent internal audit reports for student lending. Determine whether \n \n• reports are issued in a timely manner following completion of the on-site work. \n• reports accurately identify concerns. \n• significant issues require management’s written response. \n• management initiates timely and appropriate corrective action. \n• issues identified and the status of corrective actions are tracked and reported to senior \nmanagement. \n \nNote: Weaknesses identified by examiner s, but not identified by internal audit, may be \nevidence of deficiencies in internal audit processes or staffing . \n \nOther Controls \n \n21. Confirm that there is an adequate student lending process in place to reconcile major \nbalance sheet categories and general ledger entries on a daily basis. \n 22. Identify and determine the adequacy of the bank’s student lending process for regularly \nevaluating data integrity and MIS accuracy. \n \n• Review the scope and frequency of internal audit or other reviews of MIS accuracy. \n• Review the findings of the most recent reviews. \n 23. Develop conclusions on the adequacy of th e bank’s processes for identifying, measuring, \nmonitoring, and controlling risk by reviewing the effectiveness of risk management and other control functions. Clearly document all findings. \n Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 74 Student Lending Profitability \n \nObjective: To a ssess the quantity, quality, and sustainability of student lending earnings. \n \nNote: For banks that securitize, examiners should review income statements for managed \nassets. \n 1. Obtain and review copies of the income statement for the student loan portfolio and for each significant form of st udent loan offered. Assess whether the reports include all \npertinent income and expense items including overhead and funding costs. \n 2. Ascertain the contribution of the student loan portfolio to earnings and the expected contribution in the future. \n \n• Review executive management monthly or quarterly performance reports and \nportfolio quality MIS packages. \n• Review historical trends, including changes in the product contributions. \n• Review financial projections and budget and plan variances. \n• Review significant income and expense components and measures. Items reviewed \nshould include noninterest income (fees and other add-ons), marketing expenses, \ncharge -offs, net interest margin, and risk- adjusted yield. \n• Evaluate the methodologies, assumptions, and documentary support for the bank’s \nplanning and forecasting processes. Determine whether material changes are expected \nin any of the key income and expense components and measures. \n• Determine the bank ’s return on assets\n85 and return on equity86 hurdles, and the actual \nreturns a s of the examination date. Asset -based measures are typically more \nmeaningful for comparison because banks allocate capital differently. \n 3. Verify that the bank appropriately recognizes uncollectible accrued interest and fees through ALLL, through a separate interest and fee reserve, or through cash income recognition. \n 4. Review the bank’s stress test and discuss potential earnings volatility through an economic cycle with management to assess sustainability. If the bank does not perform stress testing, discuss if and how management prices loans to withstand economic downturns. \n 5. Determine whether the bank’s cost accounting system is capable of generating profit data by product, segment (including grade), channel, and account. \n \n \n85 The bank’s return on assets is an indicator of how profi table the bank is relative to its total assets and can \nshow how efficiently management uses its assets to generate earnings. Return on assets is calculated by dividing \na bank’s annual earnings by its total assets. \n \n86 Return on equity means the amount of ne t income returned as a percentage of shareholders’ equity. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 75 Student Lending 6. Assess the profitability of each product. \n \n• For each product, review profitability by credit score band, credit grade, sub-\nportfolio, school, and vintage, as appropriate. \n• Compare actual results with projections and discuss variances with management. \n \n7. Evaluate profitability by channel. \n \n• Through discussions with the examiner responsible for third-party management, \ndetermine profitability generated through the various channels (e.g., third- party \noriginators). \n• Compare the profitability of the loans generated by the various channels. \n \n8. Determi ne the adequacy of the pricing method. \n \n• Review the pricing strategy, pricing method, and pricing model, if applicable. \n• Review the major assumptions used in the pricing method and assess reasonableness. \nBe alert to differences in assumptions by product and channel. \n• Determine whether pricing is driven by risk, capital, or some other allocation method or hurdle, and how much, if any, it is driven by the competition. \n• Determine whether the pricing method incorporates a realistic break -even analysis, \nand whether the analysis reflects the true costs of prolonged deferment of student \nloans and default rates of certain student loan programs. \n• Review the pricing matrix, by product. \n 9. Assess the adequacy of planning, reporting, and analysis with respect to deferment. Specifically, ascertain whether management identifies the volume and trends of student loans with high default rates relative to market to determine exposure and impact on earnings. \n 10. Develop conclusions on the quantity, quality, and sustainability of earnings. \n \nThird -Party Relationship Risk Management \n \nObjective: To d etermine the extent of third -party involvement in student lending activities and \nevaluate the effectiveness of management’s third -party oversight and risk management \nprocesses. \n These procedures apply to any arrangements with third parties to provide student loan- related \nservices to customers on the bank’s behalf. Banks may fully “outsource” loan originations, servicing, collection activities (using collection agencies or attorneys), or the offering of products in the bank’s name. Refer to OCC Bulletin 2013-29, “Third-Party Relationships: Risk Management Guidance,” for additional information on OCC expectations. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 76 Student Lending 1. Determine the adequacy of the bank’s third- party risk management program. \n \n• Assess the adequacy of the risk management policy and determine that analysis, \ndocumentation, and reporting requirements are clearly addressed. \n• Determine that management has designated an individual to be responsible for the \nprogram and has delegated the authority necessary for its effective administration to \nthat individual. \n• Review the bank’s process for maintaining a com plete list of third partie s used by the \nbank. \n• Review the bank’s criteria for designating “ significant” third parties according to the \ndollar amount of the contract, the importance of the service provided, and the potential risk involved in the activity. While the risk management program should \naddress all third -party relationships, the OCC expects a more rigorous process to \nmanage those third partie s deemed significant. \n• Review the bank’s due diligence process and determine whether the process \n– provides for comprehensive, well-documented reviews by qualified staff. \n– identifies any potential conflicts of interest with bank directors, officers, staff, and their related interests. \n– addresses compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, including safety and soundness regulatory standards, and laws prohibiting lending discrimination and unfair or deceptive practices. \n 2. Identify third parties that provide significant student loan services on the bank’s behalf, \nparticularly those that provide loan origination and servicing of both private and FFELP runoff portfolios. Determine the bank’s relationship manager for each of those third \npartie s. \n 3. Verify that ban k management’s expertise in the outsourced activities is sufficient to \naccurately identify and manage the risks involved. \n 4. Determine whether management has adequate controls, including policies , procedures \nand monitoring controls, to avoid becoming involved with a third party engaged in discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, or predatory lending practices. If weaknesses or concerns are found, consult the bank’s EIC or compliance examiner. \n \nNote: For additional information, refer to the “Fair Lending” b ooklet of the \nComptroller’s Handbook and OCC Advisory Letter 2002-3, “Guidance on Unfair or \nDeceptive Acts or Practices.” \n 5. Assess the adequacy of contract management, focusing on the process for ensuring that \nclauses necessary to effectively manage the third parties are included. \n \n• Determine whether the bank has a current contract on file for all third parties and that \nthe bank monitors key dates (e.g., maturity, renewal, and adjustment periods). \n• Review a sample of contracts with significant third partie s to confirm that the \ncontracts satisfactorily address the following : Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 77 Student Lending – Scope of the arrangement, including the frequency, content, and format of \nservices provided by each party. \n– Outsourcing notifications or approvals required, if the third party proposes to \nsubcontract a service to another party. \n– All costs and compensation, including any incentives. \n– Performance standards, including when standards can be adjusted and the consequences of failing to meet those standards. \n– Reporting and MIS requirements. \n– Data owne rship and access. \n– Appropriate privacy and confidentiality restrictions. \n– Requirements for compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, including safety and soundness regulatory standards, and laws prohibiting lending discrimination and unfair or dec eptive practices. \n– Mandatory third -party control functions such as quality assurance and audit, \nincluding requirements for submitting audit results to the bank. \n– Expectations and responsibilities for business resumption and contingency plans. \n– Responsibility for consumer complaint resolution and associated reporting to the bank. \n– Third -party financial statement submission requirements. \n– Appropriate dispute resolution, liability, recourse, penalty, indemnification, and termination clauses. \n– The authority for the bank to perform on- site third -party reviews. Third- party \nperformance of services is subject to OCC examination oversight. \n• Determine whether the bank’s monitoring of third partie s’ adherence to the bank’s \ncontracts (especially to financial terms and performance standards) is adequate in frequency and scope. \n• Determine whether issues identified through the monitoring process are appropriately \nresolved in a timely manner. \n \n6. Assess the adequacy of the monitoring process for significant third partie s. \n \n• Using the sample of significant third partie s reviewed in the previous procedure, \nconfirm that the bank’s oversight incorporates, at a minimum, – reports evidencing the third party’s performance relative to service- level \nagreements and other contract provisions. \n– customer complaints and resolutions for the services and products outsourced. \n– third-party financial statements and audit reports. \n– compliance with applicable laws and regulations. \n• Evaluate whether the process results in an accurate determination of whether \ncontractual terms and conditions are being met, and whether any revisions to service-\nlevel agreements or other terms are needed. \n• Verify whether management documents and follows up on performance, operational, \nor compliance problems and whether the documentation and follow- ups are timely \nand effective. \n• Determine whether the relationship manager or other bank staff periodically meets \nwith its third partie s to discuss performance and operational issues. Examination Procedures > Supplemental Examination Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 78 Student Lending • Determine whether third -party risk m anagement administers call monitoring, mystery \nshopper, customer callback, or customer satisfaction programs, if appropriate. \n• Assess the adequacy of the bank’s process for determining when on- site reviews are \nwarranted, the scope of those reviews, and repo rting of results. \n• Determine whether management evaluates the third party’s ongoing ability to perform \nthe contracted functions in a satisfactory manner based on performance and financial \ncondition. \n 7. For third -party loan originators, \n \n• assess the adequacy of the process used to qualify third parties for loan origination. \n• assess the adequacy of the reports and tracking mechanisms in place to monitor \nperformance (e.g., volume of applications submitted, approved, and booked; quality; \nexceptions ; and loan performance) and relationship profitability, including \nperformance and profitability compared with projections. \n• assess the adequacy of the process used to monitor compliance with the bank’s \nlending policies, and applicable laws and regulations. \n• verify that management maintains a watch list for problematic originators and that actions taken (including termination of the relationship, if warranted) are appropriate \nand timely. \n 8. Assess the adequacy of the content, accuracy, and distribution of third -party management \nprogram reports. \n 9. Determine whether the bank has any loans to the third party and whether any other conflicts of interest exist. \n 10. Determine whether any insiders have relationships with the third parties used by the bank and whether any potential conflicts of interest exist (e.g., insider has ownership interests, officer or board positions, or loans to the third party). \n 11. Determine whether the bank is involved in any significant third-party relationships where deficiencies in management expertise or controls result in the failure to adequately identify and manage the associated risk. If so, consult with the EIC and the supervisory office and determine whether it is appropriate to require that the activity be suspended pending satisfactory corrective action. \n 12. Develop conclusions on the extent of third -party involvement in student lending activities \nand the effectiveness of management’s third -party oversight and risk management \nprocesses. Include any Education Department servicer review findings. Clearly document \nall findings. \n Examination Procedures > Conclusions \nComptroller’s Handbook 79 Student Lending Conclusions \n \nConclusion: The aggregate level of each associated risk is \n(low, moderate, or high). \nThe direction of each associated risk is \n(increasing, stable, or decreasing). \n \nObjective: To determine, document, and communicate overall findings and conclusions regarding \nthe examination of student lending. \n 1. Determine preliminary examination findings and conclusions and discuss with the EIC, including \n \n• quantity of associated risks (as noted in the “Introduction” section). \n• quality of risk management. \n• aggregate level and direction of associated risks. \n• overall risk in student lending. \n• violations and other concerns. \n \nSummary of Risks Associated With Student Lending \nRisk category Quantity of risk Quality of risk \nmanagement Aggregate level \nof risk Direction of risk \n(Low, \nmoderate, \nhigh) (Weak, \ninsufficient, \nsatisfactory, \nstrong) (Low, \nmoderate, \nhigh) (Increasing, \nstable, \ndecreasing) \nCredit \nInterest rate \nLiquidity \nOperational \nCompliance \nStrategic \nReputation \n 2. If substantive safety and soundness concerns remain unresolved that may have a material adverse effect on the bank, further expand the scope of the examination by completing verification procedures. \n 3. Discuss examination findings with bank management, including violations, recommendations, and conclusions about risks and risk management practices. If necessary, obtain commitments for corrective action. \n Examination Procedures > Conclusions \nComptroller’s Handbook 80 Student Lending 4. Compose conclusion comments, highlighting any issues that should be included in the \nROE. If necessary, compose a m atters requiring attention comment. \n 5. Update the OCC’s information system and any applicable ROE schedules or tables. \n 6. Write a memorandum specifically setting out what the OCC should do in the future to effectively supervise student lending in the bank, including time periods, staffing, and workdays required. \n 7. Update, organize, and reference work papers in accordance with OCC policy. \n 8. Ensure any paper or electronic medi a that contain sensitive bank or customer information \nare appropriately disposed of or secured. \n Examination Procedures > Internal Control Questionnaire \nComptroller’s Handbook 81 Student Lending Internal Control Questionnaire \n \nAn ICQ helps an examiner assess a bank’s internal controls for an area. ICQs typically address standard controls that provide day- to-day protection of bank assets and financial \nrecords. The examiner decides the extent to which it is necessary to complete or update ICQs during examination planning or after reviewing the findings and conclusions of the core assessment. \n \nPolicies \n 1. Has the board of directors, consistent with its duties and responsibilities, adopted written policies that established \n \n• procedures for reviewing student loan applications? \n• standards for determining loan amounts? \n• minimum standards for documentation? \n• standards for collection procedures? \n 2. Are policies reviewed at least annually to determine that they are compatible with changing market conditions, the bank’s risk profile, and the bank’s strategic plan? \n \nUnderwriting and Scoring Models \n 3. Does audit or internal loan review test compliance with student loan underwriting standards? \n 4. Are underwriting standards periodically reviewed and revised? \n 5. If credit scoring models are used , \n \n• are credit limits determined by cutoff scores? \n• are models periodically revalidated? \n• are there internal procedures governing overrides? \n 6. Is data from the application tested for input accuracy to the bank’s account processing system? If so, what is the sample size and frequency of the t est? \n 7. Is an exception report produced and reviewed by management that includes student loan deferment, extensions, forbearance, restructure, modification, or other factors that would \nresult in a change in customer account status? \n 8. Does the student lending operation prepare a budget by \n \n• function (e.g., collections or application processing)? \n• program (e.g., graduate, undergraduate, or profession)? Examination Procedures > Internal Control Questionnaire \nComptroller’s Handbook 82 Student Lending • overall line of business? \n \n9. Are actual results compared to budget at least monthly? \n 10. Are significant trends and deviations adequately explained in the financial review process? \n 11. Do asset securitizations receive appropriate approval? \n 12. Are collection programs for securitized loans appropriate? \n 13. Does management have a plan to ensure adequate funding for maturing securitizations? \n \nRisk Management \n 14. Does management develop and maintain student lending underwriting and account management guidelines? \n 15. Does management monitor adherence to those guidelines? \n 16. Does management ascertain the quality of the portfolio and assi gn risk ratings? \n 17. Does management periodically review policies and procedures for adequacy and assess their impact on portfolio quality? \n 18. Does management adequately assess the integrity of scoring systems and other models in \nuse? \n \nConclusion \n 19. Is the forego ing information an adequate basis for evaluating internal controls in that \nthere are no significant additional internal auditing procedures, accounting controls, administrative controls, or other circumstances that impair any controls or mitigate any weaknesses indicated above? (Explain negative answers briefly and indicate conclusions \nas to their effect on specific examination or verification procedures). \n 20. Based on the answers to the foregoing questions, internal control for student lending is \nconsidered (strong, satisfactory, insufficient, or weak). \n Examination Procedures > Verification Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 83 Student Lending Verification Procedures \n \nVerification procedures are used to verify the existence of assets and liabilities, or test the reliability of financial records. Examiners generally do not perform verification procedures as \npart of a typical examination. Rather, verification procedures are performed when substantive \nsafety and soundness concerns are identified that are not mitigated by the bank’s risk management systems and internal controls. \n \nObjective: To v erify the authenticity of the bank’s student loans and test the accuracy of records \nand adequacy of record keeping. \n Note: Examiners normally do not need to perform extensive verification. T hese procedures , \nhowever, are appropriate when the bank has inadequate audit coverage of student lending activities or when fraud or other irregularities are suspected. \n 1. Test the additions of the trial balances and the reconciliation of the trial balances to the gene ral ledger. Include loan commitments and other contingent liabilities. \n 2. After selecting loans from the trial balance by using an appropriate sampling technique (refer to the “Sampling Methodologies” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook for \nguidance on sam pling techniques), \n \n• prepare and mail confirmation forms to borrowers. (Loans serviced by other \ninstitutions, either whole loans or participations, are usually confirmed only with the \nservicing institution. Loans serviced for other institutions, either whol e loans or \nparticipations, should be confirmed with the buying institution and the borrower. Confirmation forms should include borrower’s name, loan number, the original amount, interest rate, current loan balance, and borrower status). \n• after a reasonable time, mail second requests. \n• follow up on any unanswered requests for verification or exceptions and resolve \ndifferences. \n• examine notes for completeness and compare agree date, amount, and terms with trial \nbalance. \n• in the event notes are not held at the bank, request confirmation by the holder. \n• check to see that required officer approvals are on the note. \n• check to see that note is signed, appears to be genuine, and is negotiable. \n 3. Review accounts with accrued interest by \n \n• reviewing and testing procedures for accounting for accrued interest and for handling \nadjustments. \n• scanning accrued interest for any unusual entries and following up on any unusual \nitems by tracing them to initial and supporting records. \n \n4. Using a list of nonaccruing loans, check loan accrual records to determine that interest income is not being recorded. Examination Procedures > Verification Procedures \nComptroller’s Handbook 84 Student Lending 5. Obtain or prepare a schedule showing the monthly interest income amounts and the loan \nbalance at each month’s end since the last examination, and \n \n• calculate yield . \n• investigate any significan t fluctuations or trends. \n Appendixes > Appendix A \nComptroller’s Handbook 85 Student Lending Appendixes \n \nAppendix A: Transaction Testing \n \nOverview \n \nExaminers should perform testing procedures when the EIC determines that the OCC should verify a bank’s compliance wit h its own policies and procedures or with regulatory policies, \nregulations, or laws. The EIC institutes testing when deemed appropriate to assess the bank’s risk selection, the accuracy of the bank’s MIS, or the accuracy of its loan accounting and servicin g. Testing procedures usually are performed periodically on student loan portfolios or \ntargeted segments of the portfolios, and when there is elevated risk (e.g., loans to students \nattending for- profit schools), an increase in delinquency and loss rates, new student loan \nprograms, new acquisition channels, or rapid growth, or when loan review or audit is \ninadequate. \n Examiners conducting testing should be alert for potential discriminatory, unfair, deceptive, abusive, or predatory lending practices (e.g., providing misleading disclosures). If weaknesses are found or other concerns arise, consult the bank’s EIC or compliance examiner. \n These procedures recommend judgmental sample sizes. Sample sizes are suggestions only. The sample size and targeted portfolio segment may be modified to fit the circumstances. The sample selected should be sufficient in size to reach a supportable conclusion. Increase the sample size if questions arise and more evidence is needed to support the conclusion. Examiners may want to consider using a statistical sampling process for reaching conclusions on an entire portfolio. Performing statistically valid transaction testing on portfolios of homogeneous retail accounts is extremely effective. The benefits of statistical sampling allow the examiner to quantify the results of transaction testing and state with a statistically valid level of confidence that the results are reliable. For additional information , consult the \n“Sampling Methodologies” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook . \n Note: Appropriate sample size may vary based on the volume and complexity of the bank’s \nprivate student lending activities. \n \nUnderwriting \n \nObjective: To d etermine the quality of new student loans and risk selection. Determine adherence \nto lending policy, underwriting standards, and pricing standards. \nSample size—30 Loans and accounts booked in the last 90 days. \n• Include coverage of all significant student loan products. \n• Include all or target certain acquisition channels. \n• Include different price points. Appendixes > Appendix A \nComptroller’s Handbook 86 Student Lending Sample size—10 \nfrom third -party \norigination channel Loans and accounts approved and booked in the last 90 days. \n• Include all significant third-party loan originators. \n \nSample size—30 Loans and accounts declined in the last 90 days. \n• Include coverage of all significant student loan products. \n• Include all or target certain acquisition channels. \n• Focus on applications not automatically denied if credit scoring is used. \n \nLending Policy Exceptions \n \nObjective: To e valuate the quality and appropriateness of exceptions to lending policy. \n \nSample size—30 Loan and accounts booked in the last 90 days. \n• Include all exception codes. \n• Include coverage of all significant product types. \n• Include loans with exceptions from all significant third-party loan originators (if \nany). \n• If exception coding is deficient, filter new loans for exceptions to debt -to-income, \ncredit history, etc., and select sample. \n \nOverrides \n \nObjective: To e valuate the quality and appropriateness of low- score overrides. \n \nSample size—30 Loan and accounts booked in the last 90 days. \n• Select loans that scored below cutoff and were approved. \n• Include all score override reason codes. \n• Include loans in all score bands below the cutoff. \n \nCollection Activities \n \nObjective: To e valuate appropriateness of collection activities and consistency with OCC Bulletin \n2000-20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy: Policy \nImplementation,” and CNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000-20—Application to Private Student Lending.” Note: Refer to the checklist in \nappendix C of this booklet. \nPayment Extensions \n \nSample size—30 Student loans that received extended grace periods in the past three months that \nbrought the loans to current status. \n• Include loans that were two payments or more past due. \n• Check consistency with FFIEC policies. \n• Check compliance with bank policies. \n Appendixes > Appendix A \nComptroller’s Handbook 87 Student Lending Restructures and Modifications \n \nSample size —30 Student loans that were restructured and modified in the past three months. \n• Check consistency with FFIEC policies. \n• Check compliance with bank policies. \n \nForbearance, Extension, and W orkout Programs \n \nSample size—30 per \nprogram Student loans that were in a workout program in the past three months. \n• Include any program with payment amount, interest, or fee modification. \n• Verify how the minimum payment is calculated. \n• Select 50 percent of sample from accounts that entered the program in the last \nquarter. \n• Evaluate the reasonableness of programs, i.e. , qualifying criteria, interest rate, \npayment amount, and repayment period. \n• Verify compliance with internal policies and procedures. \n• Determine the type and length of time in temporary hardship program. \n• Be alert to the movement of accounts from one program to another or stacking of \nworkout arrangements. \n Settlement \n \nSample size—30 Student loans with settlement agreement s in the past three months. \n• Verify compliance with internal policies and procedures. \n• Evaluate the reasonableness of the repayment period. \n• Determine the appropriateness of loan allowance and charge-offs. \n Was Past Due, Now Current \n \nSample size—30 Student loans that were 90 days or more past due as of three months ago but current \nas of the next month . \n• Check consistency with FFIEC policies. \n• Check compliance with bank policies. \n• Determine how the loan returned to current status and its appropriateness. \n• Assess the accuracy of the loan accounting system and delinquency reporting. \n• Consider the impact of any irregularities on roll rates and loan loss method. \n \nSample size—30 Student loans that were 60 days or more past due as of three months ago but are \ncurrent in the next month. \n• Check consistency with FFIEC policies. \n• Check compliance with bank policies. \n• Determine how the loan returned to current status and its appropriateness. \n• Assess the accuracy of the loan accounting system and delinquency reporting. \n• Consider the impact of any irregularities on roll rates and loan loss method. \n Appendixes > Appendix A \nComptroller’s Handbook 88 Student Lending Exceptions to C harge -Off Policy \n \nSample size —30 Student loans more than 120 days past due as of exam ination date. \n• Include loans from each product type. \n• Check consistency with FFIEC policies. \n• Check compliance with bank policies. \n• Evaluate whether exceptions to FFIEC policy are appropriate. \n \nCharge -Off Post Mortem \n \nSample size—30 Recently charged- off loans. \n• Include loans from each product type. \n• Check consistency with FFIEC policies. \n• Check compliance with bank policies. \n• Review borrower, payment, and collection histories to determine whether actions \ntaken pre-charge-off were reasonable or if the practices deferred loss \nrecognition. \n• Evaluate whether exceptions to FFIEC policy are appropriate. \n Appendixes > Appendix B \nComptroller’s Handbook 89 Student Lending Appendix B: Sample Request Letter \n \nProvide the following information for student lending operations as of the close of business [DATE ], unless otherwise indicated. Information in an electronic format is preferred. If \nsubmitting hard copies, prominently mark any information and documentation that is to be returned to the bank. Our intent is to request information that can be easily obtained. If you find that the information and documentation are not readily available or require significant effort on your part to compile , contact us before compiling the data. \n Note that the following list is not all-inclusive. W e may request additional items during the \ncourse of our on- site examination , as well as thereafter . \n \nGeneral \n 1. Summary of each student loan product offered and a brief description of characteristics and terms. Include marketing or acquisition channels used (e.g., direct, Internet, mail, and third -party originators), where applicable. \n 2. Descriptions of any new or expanded products or marketing initiatives since the last examination and any upcoming plans, including information on criteria and eligibility. \n 3. Descriptions of any third- party loan generation or servicing arrangements (e.g., collection \nagencies). \n 4. Descriptions of any student loan portfolios acquired since the last examination, including due diligence reports. \n \nSenior Management and Oversight \n 5. For any senior management and oversight committees, the most current committee \nmanagement information system (MIS) package and the last 12 months of committee minutes. \n 6. Current set of organizational charts for all functions , including supporting necessary \noperations. Provide contact information for all key managers. \n 7. If available, a current version of the student lending s trategic plan. At a minimum, we \nwould like to arrange for a meeting to discuss the major strategic initiatives and \nassumptions involved in this process. \n 8. Current income statement and balance sheet that compare actual results against the \noriginal and updated forecast. If available, provide product level profitability information. \n Appendixes > Appendix B \nComptroller’s Handbook 90 Student Lending 9. Any updated competitive market analysis, industry trade publications, or economic data \nthat management reviews on a regular basis. \n 10. Any additional key MIS reports that are not provided elsewhere and that are used by senior management to oversee the student lending unit. \n \nUnderwriting \n 11. Chronological log of policy or credit criteria changes implemented since the last \nexamination, along with a listing of other significant changes to operating procedures. Provide available approval decks. \n 12. Summary reports of [DATE] and year- to-date [DATE] application volume, including \napprovals, denials, and withdrawals by product and channel. \n 13. Description of loan policy exception tracking systems, along with the most recent summary reports of underwriting exceptions. Describe monitoring and control processes. \n 14. Current copies of matric es or tables detailing the underwriting process. \n 15. Policy guidelines for new products or major modification to an existing product, e.g., planning, testing , roll -out, monitoring, and pro forma review. \n 16. Criteria for the cosigner release option. Provide information on the number of borrowers \n(and percent of borrowers in repayment) who qualified for this program during [DATE] \nand year-to-date [DATE] and any performance tracking of this program (on- time \npayment qualifiers). \n \nRisk Management \n 17. Complete set of current risk management reports utilized to assess the quality of borrower s and monitor portfolio risk. \n 18. All risk management executive summary reports created for [DATE] and year -to-date \n[DATE] that address growth, delinquencies, losses, bankruptcies, portfolio composition, and other portfolio data. \n 19. Current [DATE] growth and loss forecasts for each major portfolio segment. \n 20. Summary monthly delinquency and net loss reports for each portfolio, inc luding the most \nrecent vintage and loss analysis, along with current delinquency and loss distributions by key credit characteristics. \n 21. Information on performance and loss assumptions for private student loan portfolios originated under third-party underwr iting guidelines. \n Appendixes > Appendix B \nComptroller’s Handbook 91 Student Lending 22. Narrative description of any account management practices employed by the bank . \n \n23. List of all models used for origination and pricing including model name, purpose and use, developer, date implemented, date last validated, model rating, a nd a contact name \nfor questions. Ensure this list includes \n \n• any model used to determine the approved list of schools. \n• any validation and subsequent revision in the weighting of attributes used in existing \nmodels. \n \n24. Description of the bank’s concentration limits by key portfolio segments. Explain how \nthese limits are determined and monitored. \n 25. Description of the methodology used to forecast losses and how the bank accounts for different external and internal factors. Indicate how this information is used in the \nquarterly ALLL analysis. \n 26. Results of any stress testing exercise, along with supporting documentation that explains \nthe scenarios considered and key assumptions involved in the process. I dentify any \nactions taken by managemen t in response to the test results. \n \nSchool Relationship Management \n 27. Current listing of approved educational institutions. Include number and volume of \n[DATE] originations for the top 50 institutions as defined by number of accounts. \n 28. Reports used by management to monitor application volume and loan quality by individual institution. \n 29. Written criteria for approving new institutions, along with guidelines for monitoring institution relationships. Include information on grading systems, if applicable. \n 30. Management’s most recent analysis of school criteria and justification for continuing to \naccept business with institutions that exceed the maximum educational institution \nparameters. \n 31. Listing of schools where [BANK] allows an exception to the annual per student lending limit, and the current limit for each of these schools. \n \nCollections \n 32. Detailed roll rate reports for the portfolio and each major segment. \n 33. Internal guidelines and policies for charge-offs, deferments, extensions, payment \nmodification, settlement, and any other forbearance programs currently in effect or used \nduring the previous 12 months. Provide summary MIS and trend analysis for each. Appendixes > Appendix B \nComptroller’s Handbook 92 Student Lending 34. Description of process used to identify accounts with forbearance (including multiple \nforbearance instances) and to ensure that bank forbearance policies are being adhered to. \nProvide summary MIS. \n 35. Delinquency and loss information on forbearance accounts. \n 36. Full description of charge-off exception programs and relevant MIS reports . Provide the \napproval authority matrix for each program. Include lists of all accounts excepted from \ncharge -off during [DATE]. \n 37. List of accounts that were 90 or more days past due on [DATE] and current (less than \n30 days past due) on [DATE]. Include name, account number, balance, date of last payment, amount of last payment, next due date, next payment amount due, and delinquency stage on each respective date, and any identifying character showing whether the account is in a deferment or forbearance program. \n 38. Description of collection or behavior scoring models used in collection processes. \n 39. Any analysis conducted on early payment defaults during [DATE]. \n 40. Collection policies and procedures. \n \nMarketing \n 41. Information for any significant marketing initiatives planned for [DATE]. \n \nInformation Technology \n 42. Current list of primary applications and systems, including location and third party . \n \nQuality Assurance, External and Internal Audits \n 43. The [DATE] quality assurance testing plan , along with a listing of tests completed over \nthe past [NUMBER OF] months. \n 44. Summary of significant findings resulting from quality assurance reviews conducted over \nthe past six months. Provide management’s response and current status of any \noutstanding issues. \n 45. Copies of recent external audits, including those performed by the Education Department and the external auditor for government-insured loans and management’s responses to these audits. \n 46. Copies of recent internal audits, including current status reports concerning corrective action taken to address issues identified in i nternal audit reports issued since [DATE]. \n Appendixes > Appendix B \nComptroller’s Handbook 93 Student Lending Third-Party Relationship Risk Management \n \n47. Listing of all third parties used by the bank in relation to private student loan offerings \nalong with a description of the services provided, type of relationship, role in the product cycle or channel , and any cost or compensation program in [DATE] and year- to-date \n[DATE]. \n \nAllowance for Loan and Lease Losses \n 48. Most recent ALLL analysis for the student lending portfolio. Include a complete description of the method and assumptions used. \n \nOther Areas of Interest \n 49. Consumer complaint logs since the last examination. \n 50. Description of litigation, either filed or anticipated, associated with the bank’s student lending activities. Include expected costs or other implications . \n \nTransaction Testing \n Examiners conduct transaction testing to verify compliance with the bank’s policies and procedures; assess risk selection; determine accuracy of MIS; verify compliance with the applicable policies, laws, and regulations; and determi ne the accuracy of loan accounting and \nservicing. \n 51. Electronic files for each major student loan product that allow an examiner to select a \nsample to conduct the testing. The file should be provided in a format compatible with the National Credit Tool or an MS Excel worksheet that includes relevant loan information (e.g., account number, customer name, booking date, loan amount, payment information [current payment due, last payment date] , loan term, interest rate, \ndelinquency status, risk score, and repayme nt capacity measure). Note: Refer to appendix \nA, “Transaction Testing,” of this booklet for areas and loans to be tested. Appendixes > Appendix C \nComptroller’s Handbook 94 Student Lending Appendix C: Uniform Retail Credit Classi fication \nand Account Management Policy Checklist \n \nWhen using the Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy checklist, comment only in areas that apply to private student lending. \nUniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy (RCCP) \nPolicy Applicability \n• Open- and closed-end credit extended to individuals for household, family, and other personal \nexpenditures, including consumer loans, student loans, and credit cards. \n• Loans to individuals secured by their personal residence s, including first mortgage, home equity, and \nhome improvement loans. \nNote Regarding Minimum Policy Guidelines \n• The RCCP does not preclude examiners from classifying individual loans or entire portfolios regardless of \ndelinquency status or criticizing account management practices that are deficient or improperly managed. \nIf underwriting standards, risk management, or account management standards are weak and present unreasonable credit risk, deviation from the minimum classification guidelines outlined in the policy may be prudent. \n• Credit losses should be recognized when the bank becomes aware of the loss , but in no case should the \ncharge-off exceed the time frames stated in the policy. \n Reference Comments \nSubstandard Classification \n1. Does the bank consider open- and closed- end retail loans 90 \ncumulative days past due substandard? \n2. When a bank does not hold the senior mortgage on home equity loans, \ndoes the bank consider the loans substandard if they are 90 days or \nmore past due, even if the loan-to -value is 60 percent or less? \nNote: The policy states that properly secured residential real estate \nloans with loan-to -value ratios of 60 percent or less may not need to be \nclassified based solely on delinquency. \n3. For borrowers in bankruptcy and where the bank can clearly \ndemonstrate that repayment is likely to occur, does the bank classify \nthese loans as substandard until the borrower re-establishes his or her \nability and willingness to repay for at least six months? \nLoss Classification \n1. Are unsecured closed-end retail loans charged off in the month they \nbecome 120 cumulative days past due? \n2. Are secured closed-end retail loans secured by other than real estate \ncollateral charged off in the month they become 120 cumulative days \npast due? \n3. If the answer to #2 is no, are these loans written down to the value of \nthe collateral, less cost to sell, if repossession of collateral is assured \nand in process? \n4. For open- and closed-end loans secured by residential real estate, is a \ncurrent assessment of value made no later than when the account is \n180 days past due? \n5. For loans under #4, is any loan balance in excess of the value of the property, less cost to sell, charged off? \nBankruptcy \n1. Are loans in bankruptcy charged off within 60 days of receipt of \nnotification of filing from the bankruptcy court or within the 120- or 180-\nday time frame (whichever is shorter)? \n Appendixes > Appendix C \nComptroller’s Handbook 95 Student Lending Reference Comments \n2. Are loans with collateral written down to the value of collateral, less cost \nto sell? \n3. When a loan’s balance is not charged off, does the bank classify it as substandard until the borrower reestablishes the ability and willingness \nto repay for a period of at least six months? \nFraudulent Loans \n• Are fraudulent loans classified loss and charged off within 90 days of discovery or within the 120- to 180-day time frame (whichever is \nshorter)? \nDeceased Accounts \n• Are loans of deceased persons classified loss and charged off when the loss is determined or within the 120- to 180-day time frame (whichever \nis shorter)? \nOther Considerations for Classification \n• Under what conditions would the bank not classify (substandard or loss) a loan in accordance with the policy? \nNote: The policy permits nonclassification if the bank can document \nthat the loan is well -secured and in the process of collection, such that \ncollection will occur regardless of delinquency status. \nPartial Payments \n1. Does the bank require that a payment be equivalent to 90 percent or \ngreater of the contractual payment before counting the payment as a full \npayment? \n2. As an alternative, does the bank aggregate payments and give credit for \nany partial payments received? \n3. Are controls in place to prevent both methods above from being used simultaneously on the same credit? \nRe-Aging, Extensions, Deferrals, Renewals, and Rewrites \n1. Are the se types of activities only permitted when the action is based on \na renewed willingness and ability to repay the loan? \n2. Does documentation show that the bank communicated with the \nborrower, the borrower agreed to pay the loan in full, and the borrower \nhas the ability to repay the loan? \n3. Does MIS separately identify the number of accounts and dollar amount that have been re-aged, extended, deferred, renewed, or rewritten, \nincluding the number of times such action has been taken? \n4. How does the bank monitor and track the volume and performance of loans that have been re-aged, extended, deferred, renewed, rewritten, \nor placed in a work out program? \nNote: Requirements 1 through 4 do not apply to customer -service -\noriginated extensions or program extensions (such as holiday skip-a-\npay). Examples of how the bank would determine and document the borrower’s willingness and ability to repay cou ld include such items as \ncredit bureau score and data being obtained and reviewed, stated \nincome being verified, and obtaining a “hardship” letter from the \nborrower. \n Appendixes > Appendix C \nComptroller’s Handbook 96 Student Lending Reference Comments \nOpen -End Credit (Re -Aging) \n1. Is a reasonable written policy in place and adhered to? \n2. To be considered for re-aging, does the account exhibit the following: \n• Has t he borrower demonstrated a renewed willingness and ability \nto repay the loan? \n• Has t he account existed for at least nine months? \n• Has t he borrower made at least three consecutive minimum \nmonthly payments or the equivalent cumulative amount? \n• Does the bank prohibit the advancement of funds to make the \nminimum payment requirements? \n• Does the bank limit the number of re-ages to no more than once within any 12- month pe riod? \n• Does the bank limit the frequency of re- ages to no more than twice \nwithin any five-year period? \n• For over -limit accounts that the bank re- ages, does the bank \nprohibit new credit from being extended until the balance falls below the pre-delinquency cre dit limit? \n3. To be considered prudent, does the bank’s w orkout loan program \n• require the receipt of at least three consecutive minimum monthly \npayments or the equivalent cumulative amount, as agreed to in the \nworkout or debt management program, before re-aging an account \nthat enters a workout program (internal or third party)? \n• limit re-ages to once in a five-year period? \n• h ave MIS that at a minimum track s the principal reductions and \ncharge-off history of loans in workout programs by type of \nprogram? \nClosed -End Credit ( Standards, Controls, and MIS Required for Each \nArea) \n1. Has the bank adopted and adhered to explicit standards that control the use of extensions, deferrals, renewals, and rewrites? \n2. Do the standards include the following: \n• Has t he borrower shown a renewed willingness and ability to repay \nthe loan? \n• Do the standards limit the number and frequency of extensions, \ndeferrals, renewals, and rewrites? \n• Are additional advances to finance unpaid interest and fees \nprohibited? \n3. At a minimum, do MIS track the subsequent principal reductions and \ncharge-off history of loans that have been granted an extension, \ndeferral, renewal, or rewrite? \n Appendixes > Appendix D \nComptroller’s Handbook 97 Student Lending Appendix D: Loss Forecasting Tool \n \nReliable forecasts of expected consumer charge -offs are critical for risk management, \nprofitability, reserving, and capitalization. This appendix describes the three most common \nmethods: roll rate models, historical averaging , and vintage- based forecasting . Some banks \nuse combinations of all three methods for different consumer portfolios or forecasting purposes. \nRoll Rates \n Roll rate models are the most accurate short -term forecast technique. The name is derived \nfrom the practice of measuring the percentage of delinquent loans that migrate or “roll” from early delinquency to late- stage delinquency buckets, or to charge -off. The most common \nmethod is the delinquency roll rate model, in which dollars outstanding are stratified by delinquency status—typically , current, 30 to 59 days past due, 60 to 89 days past due, and so \non through charge- off. The rates at which loans migrate or roll through delinquency levels \nare then used to project losses for the current portfolio. Figure 1 describes the mechanics of \nusing roll rate analysis to track the migration of balances over a four-month period (120- day \ncharge -off period). \n \nFigure 1: Roll Rate Schematic \n \nStep 1: Calculate roll rates \n \nStep 1 is to calculate the roll rates. The following computation (f igure s 2 and 3) begins with \nthe $725 million in loans that were current in June 2014. From June 2014 to July 2014, $27 million in loans migrated from current to 30 days delinquent, which equates to a roll rate \nof 3.73 percent ($27 ÷ $725). From July 2014 to August 2014, $10.6 million rolled to the \nnext delinquency bucket, representing a 39.26 percent roll rate ($10.6 ÷ $27). Continuing \nalong the shaded , stair -stepped boxes in the following table , loss rates increase in the latter \nstages of delinquency. To smooth out some fluctuations in the data, management often \naverages roll rates by quarter before making current portfoli o forecasts, and compares \nquarterly roll rate results between quarters to analyze and adjust for seasonal effects. \n The schematic and example in f igure s 2 and 3 are simplified depictions of dollar flow to \nillustrate the basic concept of roll rates. In reality, some balances cure (return to current), remain in the same delinquency bucket, or improve to a less severe delinquency status by the end of a period. For ease of calculation, roll rate analysis assumes all dollars at the end of a period flow from the previous period bucket. \n30 \ndays \n60 \ndays \n90 \ndays \n120 \ndays \nCharge -\noff \nA% of current \nbalances roll to \n30 days at \nmonth’s end \nB% of 30 -day \ndelinquencies \nroll to 60 days \nat month’s end \nC% of 60 -day \ndelinquencies \nroll to 90 days \nat month’s end \nD% of 90 -day \ndelinquencies \nroll to 120 days \nat month’s end \nE% of 120 -day \ndelinquencies \nroll to charge-\noff at month’s \nend Appendixes > Appendix D \nComptroller’s Handbook 98 Student Lending Figure 2: Roll Rate Calculation by Outstanding Balance (in Millions) \n \nMonth (2014) Current \nbalance 30 \ndays Roll \nrate 60 \ndays Roll \nrate 90 \ndays Roll \nrate 120 \ndays Roll \nrate \nJune $724.7 $26.1 $9.9 $6.7 $3.6 \nJuly $762.0 $27.0 3.73% $10.9 41.77% $7.1 71.27% $4.7 70.36% \nAugust $788.6 $25.5 3.34% $10.6 39.26% $7.0 64.29% $4.7 67.56% \nSeptember $827.7 $29.4 3.73% $12.1 47.82% $7.9 74.88% $5.5 78.74% \n \n3rd-quarter \naverages 3.60% 42.95% 70.15% 72.22% \n \nOctober $844.6 $31.1 3.76% $12.8 43.53% $8.5 70.53% $5.9 75.58% \nNovember $896.3 $26.7 3.16% $12.4 40.03% $8.2 64.52% $5.9 69.49% \nDecember $987.3 $30.0 3.35% $11.8 44.18% $8.2 66.31% $5.8 71.29% \n \n4th-quarter \naverages 3.42% 42.58% 67.12% 72.12% \nLoss factors 0.7% 20.61% 48.41% 72.12% \n \nStep 2: Calculate loss factors by bucket \n \nStep 2 is to calculate loss factors for each bucket. To calculate the loss factor from the \n“current” bucket, multiply all average roll rates from the most recent quarterly average. In \nthis example , the fourth quarter average roll rates produce this factor: 3.42% x 42.58% x \n67.12% x 72.12%, resulting in a 0.70 percent loss rate for loans in the current bucket. To \ndetermine the loss rate for the 30 -day account s, multiply the most recent quarterly averages \nfor the 60-, 90-, and 120-day buckets, resulting in a loss factor of 20.61 percent. Applying the same method results in a loss factor of 48.41 percent for the 60-day bucket and 72.12 percent for the 90- day buc ket. \n \nStep 3 : Apply loss factors to the current portfolio \n \nFigure 3: Loss Forecast Using Roll Rates \n \nDecember 31, 2014 Outstandings \n(in millions) Loss factor Loss forecast \n(in millions) \nCurrent days $987.4 0.7% $6.9 \n30 $30.2 20.61% $6.2 \n60 $11.8 48.41% $5.7 \n90 $8.2 72.12% $5.9 \n120 $5.9 100% $5.9 \nTotals $1,043.5 2.93% $30.6 \n Appendixes > Appendix D \nComptroller’s Handbook 99 Student Lending Step 3 is to forecast losses for the existing portfolio by applying the loss factors for each \nbucket (developed in step 2) to the current portfolio. In this example , the portfolio’s expected \nloss rate over the next four months is 2.93 percent. The major advantage of roll rate analysis is its relative simplicity and considerable accuracy out to nine months. Portfolios are often segmented by product, customer type, or other relevant groupings to increase precision and accuracy. Collection managers use roll rate \nreports extensively to anticipate workload and staffing needs and to assess and adjust collection strategies. \n The main limitation of roll rates is that the pred ictive power of delinquency roll rate declines \nafter nine months. The delinquency focus causes forecasts to lag underlying changes in portfolio quality, especially in the relatively large current bucket. Portfolio quality changes occur because of such factors as underwriting and cutoff score adjustments, product mix \nchanges, and shifts in economic conditions. Roll rate analysis may underestimate loss exposure when these factors cause portfolio quality to weaken. Finally, roll rate methodology assumes loans migrate through an orderly succession of delinquency stages before charge-off. In actuality, customers often migrate to charge-off status after sporadic payments or rush \nto that status by declaring bankruptcy. \nHistorical \n Historical averaging is a rudimentary method for forecasting loss rates. Management tracks \nhistorical charge-offs, adjusts for recent loss experience trends, and adds some qualitative recognition of current economic conditions or changes in portfolio mix. This method is highly judgmental and is used primarily by less sophisticated banks, or for stable, conservatively underwritten products. The most common of these products are residential mortgages when the collateral protection is conservative or the loans carry some sort of third-party guaranty or insurance. \n The method is sometimes used for allowance purposes and monitoring general product or portfolio trends. The advantage is simplicity, and data needs are modest. Results can be \nreasonably accurate as long as underwriting standards remain relatively constant and economic or competitive conditions do not change markedly. The major limitation is that forecasts will lag behind underlying changes in portfolio quality if competitive or economic conditions change. The judgmental nature of the process introduces potential bias by allowing forecasters to rely on longer run averages when conditions deteriorate and short-run trends at the earliest signs of recovery, either of which results in lower loss estimates. In \naddition, the method does not provide meaningful information on the effects of changes in product or customer mix, and it is difficult to apply any but the most basic stress tests. \n \nVintage \n Vintage-based forecasting tracks delinquency and loss curves by time on books as different vintages or marketing campaign season s. The patterns or curves are predictive for future \nvintages, if adjustments are made for changes in underwriting criteria, altered cutoffs, and Appendixes > Appendix D \nComptroller’s Handbook 100 Student Lending economic conditions. The advantage of vintage- based forecasting is that its accuracy is \nusually better than roll rate forecasts for charge-offs beyond a one-year horizon, if the need \nfor adjustments is readily observed. Management should adjust the future loss expectations \nwhen new vintages are observed to deviate markedly from past curves and trajectories, or if economic and market conditions change. The disadvantages of vintage- based forecast ing are \nthat it is more subjective and less accurate than roll rates for short -term forecasting and that it \nrelies on the assumption tha t new vintages will perform similarly to older vintages. \n Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 101 Student Lending Appendix E: Glossary \n \nNote: Sources include the U.S. Department of Education, the Common Manual , and industry \nwebsites, including FinAid. \n \nAcademic year: The period during which school is in session, consisting of at least 30 weeks \nof instructional time. The academic year typically runs from approximately the beginning of \nSeptember through the end of May at most colleges and universities. Allowance for loan and lease l osses (ALLL): A valuation reserve that represents an \nestimate of uncollectible amounts ( probable and i ncurred losses) that is used to reduce the \nbook value of loans and leases to the amount that is expected to be collected. The allowance is established and maintained by charges against the bank’s operating income, that is , the \nprovision expense. Amortization: The process of gradually repaying a loan over a period of time through \nperiodic installments of principal and interest. \n Award l etter: An official document issued by a school’ s financial aid office that lists all of \nthe financial aid awarded to the student. \n Award year: The academic year for which financial aid is requested (or received). The \nperiod from July 1 of a given calendar year through June 30 of the following calendar year. Bankruptcy: Judicial action to stay the normal collection of debts against the petitioner and \ncause those debts deemed to be satisfied at the direction of the court. Bankruptcies are classified under the U.S. Code by “chapters,” which refer to parts of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Campus -based programs: The Federal Perkins Loan, Federal Work- Study, and Federal \nSupplemental Educational Opportunity Grant programs. These programs and their related funds are administered directly by a school’s financial aid office. In return, the school is allowed to retain a percentage of each program’s funds for its administrative costs. Awards are made from a fixed pool of money. Cancellation: Loan cancellation ends the obligation to repay the debt and typically involves \nthe discharge or forgiveness of the loan balance (i ncluding any accrued but unpaid interest). \n Capitalization: The practice of adding unpaid interest charges to the principal balance of a \nloan. Interest is then charged on the new balance, including both the unpaid principal and the accrued interest . \n \nCohor t default r ate (CDR) : The percentage of borrowers in the cohort who default on \ncertain loans made under federal student loan programs before the end of the second fiscal \nyear after the fiscal year in which they entered repayment on their loans. The Educati on Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 102 Student Lending Department releases information on CDRs annually. For more information on the CDR and \nhow it is calculated, refer to the Education Department’s website . \n Collection agency: A company often hired by the lender or guara ntee agency to recover \ndefaulted loans. Consolidation loan: Also called loan consolidation, a consolidation loan combines several \nstudent loans into one larger loan from a single lender. The consolidation loan is like a \nrefinance and is used to pay off the balances on the other loans. Cosigner: Any person who assumes personal liability, in any capacity, for the obligation of a \nborrower without receiving goods, services, or money in return for the obligation. The cosigner is equally and severally liable and is expected to make payments on the primary \nborrower’s debt should that person default. Cost of attendance: An estimate of the student’s educational expenses for the period of \nenrollment. \n Credit history: A credit history is a record of all events con nected with payment of a set of \ndebts, such as on-time payments, late payments, nonpayment, default, liens, and bankruptcy discharge. A credit history can include both current and previous credit accounts and their \nbalances, employment and personal information, and history of past credit problems. Credit s coring: A statistical method for predicting the creditworthiness of applicants and \nexisting customers. \n Default: A loan is in default when the borrower fails to pay several regular installments on \ntime or otherwise fails to meet the terms and conditions of the loan. A borrower who is \n120 days late on a private student loan or 270 days late on a federal education loan is considered to be in default. Default f ee: Synonymous with guarantee fee. A guarantee i s an agreement to purchase title \nto a loan if the borrower defaults on his or her obligation to repay the debt. \n Deferment: Occurs when a borrower is allowed to postpone repaying the loan. \n Delinquent: A period that begins on the day after the due date of a payment when the borrower fails to make a full payment. Dependency s tatus: A measure of the degree to which a student has access to his or her \nparents’ financial resources. \n Direct loans: The William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program (Direct Loan Program) is a \nfederal program in which the school becomes the lending agency and manages the funds directly, with the federal government providing the loan funds. The terms for direct l oans are \nthe same as for loans issued under the Stafford Loan program. Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 103 Student Lending Direct Parent al Loans for Undergraduate Students (Direct PLUS Loans): A federal \nstudent loan available to graduate or professional degree students and parents of dependent \nundergraduate students to help pay education expenses. Parents may borrow up to the full \ncost of their children’s education, minus the amount of any other financial aid received. Direct PLUS Loans may be used to pay the expected family contribution. There is a minimal credit check required for the Direct PLUS loan. \n Disbursement: The transfer of loan proceeds by individual check, master check, or \nelectronic funds transfer by a lender to a borrower, a school, or an escrow agent. Discharge: The release of a borrower or any co signer from all or a portion of his or her loan \nobligation . \n Disclosure s tatement: Provides the borrower with information about the actual cost of the \nloan, including the interest rate, origination, insurance, loan fees, and any other types of finance charges. Lenders are required to provide the borrower with a disclosure statement before issuing a loan. Electronic data exchange : Program used by participating schools to receive Student Aid \nReport s electronically from the federal processor. At some schools, this program allows \nstudents to file their FAFSA electronically. \n Enrollment s tatus: An indication of whether a student is attending school full time or part \ntime. \n Entitlement: Entitlement programs award money to all qualified applicants. The Pell Grant \nis an example of such a program. The Individuals W ith Disabilities Education Act Federal \nSpecial Education Entitlement Grant is another example. \n Expanded lending option: Under th is option, some schools can offer higher annual and \ncumulative loan limits to students receiving a Perkins Loan. The expanded lending option is restricted to schools with a Perkins Loan default rate of 15 percent or less. \n Expected f amily c ontribution (EFC): The amount a student and the student’s spouse or \nfamily are expected to pay toward the student’s cost of attendance. Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP): A discontinued student loan program \nauthorized by Title IV, part B, of the HEA, as amended. FFELP included subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford, Direct PLUS, and consolidation loans. These loans were funded by \nlenders, guaranteed by guarantors, and reinsured by the Education Department. \n Federal methodology: The need analysis formula used to determine the EFC. The f ederal \nmethodology takes into account the family size, the number of family members in college, taxable and nontaxable income, and assets. Unlike most i nstitutional methodologies, the \nfederal methodology does not consider the net value of the family r esidence. \n Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 104 Student Lending Financial aid: Money provided to the student and the family to help them pay for the \nstudent’ s education , which is conditioned on the student’ s attendance at an educational \ninstitution. Major forms of financial aid include gift aid (grants and scholarships) and self-\nhelp aid (loans and work). Financial Aid Administrator : A staff member at an eligible school who administers \nfinancial aid programs. \n Financial Aid Office: The college or university office that is responsible for determining \nfinancial need and awarding financial aid. \n Financial aid package: The total amount of financial aid that a school awards a student. \nFederal and nonfederal aid such as loans, grants, or work-study are combined into a “package” to help meet the student’s cost of attendance. Using available resources to give each student t he best possible aid package is one of the major responsibilities of a school’s \nfinancial aid administrator. \n Financial aid t ranscript: An official record of the federal financial aid that a student \nreceived at schools the student previously attended. The record is used to assess the amount of federal financial aid the student has received and to prevent the award of federal funds for which the student or the parent of a dependent student is not eligible. The record may be obtained from the NSLDS or may be a paper report received from the previous schools. Forbearance: A period of time during which the borrower is permitted to temporarily cease \nmaking payments or reduce the amount of the payments for reasons including certain types of financial hardships. The borrower is liable for the interest that accrues on the loan during the forbearance period. Forgiveness: Loan forgiveness releases the borrower from his or her obligation to repay the \nloan, usually due to circumstances within the borrower’ s control. For student loans, t he most \ncommon loan forgiveness programs cancel all or part of the debt for working in a particular field or performing military or volunteer service. Loan forgiveness for working in a particular occupation is tax- free; other types of loa n forgiveness may result in a tax liability. There are \ntwo main types of loan forgiveness: up- front and back- end. Up-front loan forgiveness cancels \na portion of the debt for each year of service. Back- end loan forgiveness cancels any \nremaining debt after a specified number of years of service. Forgiveness is a type of loan \ncancellation. \n Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA): The form the student must complete \nto apply for federal Title IV financial assistance, including Stafford Loans. The stude nt must \ninclude financial information about the student’s household so that the EFC can be calculated. \n Garnishment: The practice of withholding a portion of a defaulted borrower’ s wages to \nrepay his or her loan, without consent. Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 105 Student Lending Grace p eriod: A time period after graduation during which the borrower is not required to \nbegin repaying his or her student loans. The grace period may also apply if the borrower \nleaves school for a reason other than graduation or drops below half- time enrollment. \nDepending on the type of loan, a borrower has a grace period of six months (Stafford Loans \nand private student loans) or nine months (Perkins Loans) before the borrower must start making payments. PLUS Loans do not have a grace period. CNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000 -20—Application to Private Student \nLending,” allows a grace period of six months for private student loans, with an additional six-month extended grace period if the borrower can document financial hardship. \n Gradua ted r epayment s chedule: A repayment schedule under which the borrower pays \nlower initial monthly payment s that gradually increase (usually in two or more increments) \nduring the course of the repayment period. For federal student loans, the graduated repaym ent schedule cannot exceed 10 years (or 25 years for borrowers eligible for an \nextended repayment schedule), excluding in-school, grace, deferment, and forbearance \nperiods. Grant: A type of financial aid based on financial need that the student does not have to \nrepay. \n Guarantee: A guarantee is an agreement to purchase title to a loan if the borrower defaults \non his or her obligation to repay the debt. Guarantee agency or guarantor: State agencies responsible for approving student loans \nand insuring them against default. Guarantee agencies also oversee the student loan process \nand enforce federal and state rules regarding student loans. Guarantee f ee: A small percentage of the loan that is paid to the guarantee agency to insure \nthe loan against default. The insurance fee is usually 1 percent of the loan amount. Also known as a default f ee. \n Half t ime: An enrollment status under which a student i n an undergraduate program is \ncarrying an academic workload that includes at least half of the acad emic workload of the \nrequired minimum full- time enrollment standard for that program. \n Income- Based Repayment Plan : A repayment plan available to a borrower who has a \npartial financial hardship or is paying a permanent -standard payment amount after qualifying \nfor such a hardship. If a lender determines that a borrower has a partial hardship , the \nborrower’s monthly paym ent amount on eligible loans is limited to 15 percent of the amount \nby which the borrower’s annual adjusted gross income exceeds 150 percent of the U.S. \nDepartment of Health and Human Services ’ poverty guideline for the borrower’s family size. \nThe Educatio n Dep artment repays the outstanding balance and accrued interest on eligible \nFFELP and direct loans after 25 years and a combination of 300 months covered by qualifying payments or economic hardship deferments, beginning no earlier than July 1, 2009. Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 106 Student Lending Inco me-Contingent Repayment Plan : A repayment schedule for some Direct Loan \nProgram loans under which the borrower’s monthly payment amount is adjusted annually, \nbased on the total amount of the borrower’s direct loans, the borrower’s family size, and the \nadjusted gross income reported on the borrower’s most recent income tax return. In the case of a married borrower who files a joint income tax return, the adjusted gross income includes the spouse’s income. Income- Sensitive Repayment Plan : A repayment schedule for some FFELP loans under \nwhich the borrower’s monthly payment amount is adjusted annually, based solely on the borrower’s expected total monthly gross income received from employment and other sources during the course of the repayment period. Independent s tudent: An independent student is at least 24 years old as of January 1 of the \nacademic year, is married, is a graduate or professional student, has a legal dependent other than a spouse, is a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces, or is an orphan or ward of the court (or was a ward of the court until age 18). A parent refusing to provide support for his or her child ’s education is not sufficient for the child to be declared independent. \n Lender s ubsidies: A set of arrangements established to encourage lenders to make federally \nguaranteed education loans. These arrangements include a federal guarantee against borrower default, special allowance payments , and lender -paid origination fees. \n LIBOR: The LIBOR, or London Interbank Offered Rate, is a variable rate index that \ntypically reflects the rates that financial institutions charge one an other for short- term loans. \n Loan s ervicer: A loan servicer is a business that collects payments on a loan and performs \nother administrative tasks associated with maintai ning a loan portfolio. \n National c redit b ureau: A credit reporting agency with a service area encompassing more \nthan a single region of the country. National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS): A database compris ing information from \nguarantors, schools, lenders, and the Education Department on Title IV aid received by \nstudents. Out-of-p ocket c ost: Out -of-pocket cost is the difference between the cost of attendance and \nthe grants, scholarships, and other gift aid in the need- based financial aid package. It reflects \nthe bottom line cost to the family, that is, the amount the family will need to pay out of current and future resources, such as savings, income, and loans. Some nonprofit colleges that have adopted no- loans financial aid policies have lower out-of- pocket costs than many \npublic colleges. Generally, families should evaluate college financial aid award letters using out-of- pocket cost. \n Out-of-s tate s tudent: A student who has not met the legal residency requirements for the \nstate and is often ch arged a higher tuition rate at public colleges and universities in the state \nthan legal residents . Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 107 Student Lending Overawards: A student who receives federal support may not receive awards totaling more \nthan $400 in excess of his or her financial need. \n Packaging: The process of assembling a financial aid package. \n Parent c ontribution: An estimate of the portion of educational expenses that the federal \ngovernment believes parents can afford. It is based on the parents’ income, the number of parents earning income, assets, family size, the number of family members currently attending a university or college, and other relevant factors. Students who qualify as independent are not expected to have a parent contribution. Participating school: An eligible school that meets the standards for participation in Title IV \nprograms, has a current p rogram participation agreement with the Education Department, and \nis eligible to receive funds under these programs. Pell Grant: A federal grant that provides up to $5,815 (in 2016–2017) based on the student’ s \nfinancial need. \n Perkins Loan: Formerly the National Direct Student Loan Program, the Perkins Loan allows \nstudents to borrow up to $3,000 per year (up to a five-year maximum) for undergraduate \nschool and $5,000 per year for graduate school (up to a six -year maximum). The Perkins \nLoan has one of the lowest interest rates and is awarded by the school’s financial aid administrator to students with exceptional financial need. The student must have applied f or a \nPell Grant to be eligible. The interest on the Perkins Loan is subsidized while the student is in school. Poverty l ine: The poverty guidelines, often referred to as the poverty line, are published \nannually by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The guidelines are a \nsimplification of the poverty thresholds published annually by the U.S. Census Bureau. The poverty line is more often used in federal student aid, such as the I ncome-B ased Repayment \nand Income-Contingent Repayment plans, as well as the economic hardship deferment. \n Preferred l ender arrangement: An arrangement or agreement between a lender and a \nschool or an institution-affiliated organization under which the lender provides or otherwise issues private education loans to students attending the school (or to the students’ families) \nand under which the school or institution-affiliated organization recommends, promotes, or endorses the lender’s education loan products. Prime l ending r ate: The prime lending r ate is the interest ra te offered by lenders to their \nbest credit customers. \n Private student loans: Education loan programs without a guarantee from the federal \ngovernment. Professional d egree: A degree that signifies both completion of the academic requirements \nfor beginning practice in a given profession and a level of professional skill beyond that Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 108 Student Lending normally required for a bachelor’s degree. Professional licensure is also generally required. \nExamples of a professional degree include pharmacy (Pharm. D.), l aw (LLB or JD), and \nmedicine (MD). \n Rehabilitation (of a defaulted loan): A process by which a borrower may bring a FFELP \nloan out of default by adhering to specified repayment requirements. Reinstatement (of borrower Title IV eligibility): A process by which a borrower with a \ndefaulted FFELP loan may regain eligibility for Title IV aid by adhering to strict repayment \nrequirements \n Repayment p eriod: The period during which payments of principal and interest are \nrequired. The repayment period follows any applicable in-school or grace period. \n Satisfactory academic p rogress: The qualitative (grade point average) and quantitative \n(time limit) measures of a student’s progress toward completing a program of study. To maintain eligibility for Title IV aid, the student must show adeq uate progress. A school must \nestablish policies regarding satisfactory academic progress and must check the progress of Title IV aid recipients at least once each academic year, or at the end of each payment period if the educational program is either one academic year in length or shorter than an academic year. \n Scholarship: A form of financial aid given to undergraduate students to help pay for their \neducation. Most scholarships are restricted to paying all or part of tuition expenses, though some scholar ships also cover room and board. Scholarships are a form of gift aid and do not \nhave to be repaid. Many scholarships are restricted to students in specific courses of study or with academic, athletic , or artistic talent. \n Skip t racing: Diligent efforts to locate a borrower’s telephone number or address when such \ninformation is unknown. Special allowance p ayments: Special allowance payments were established for FFELP to \nensure that education lenders received a market rate of return on federal education loan s. \nWhenever the borrower interest rate on the federal education loans fell below market rates, the Education Department would make special allowance payments to the lenders based on \nthe difference between the interest rates. \n Stafford Loans: Federal student loans that come in two forms, subsidized and unsubsidized. \nSubsidized loans are based on need, unsubsidized loans are not. The interest on a Subsidized Stafford Loan is paid by the federal government while the student is in school and during a six-month grace period. The Subsidized Stafford Loan was formerly known as the \nGuaranteed Student Loan. Student Aid Report: The paper output record provided to the student by the Education \nDepartment’s Central Processing System that includes information provided by the student on the FAFSA. The report also contains the student’s EFC and the results of federal database Appendixes > Appendix E \nComptroller’s Handbook 109 Student Lending matches. The electronic version that is sent to schools is called an Institutional Student \nInformation Record. Subrogation: A transfer in the ownership of a defaulted FFELP loan from a guarantor to the \nEducation Department. Loans to be subrogated must meet criteria established and revised \nannually by the department. Subsidized loan: A loan eligible for interest benefits paid by the federal government. The \nfederal government pays the interest that accrues on subsidized loans during the student’s in-school, authorized deferment, and (if applicable) post-deferment grace periods, if the loan meets certain eligibility requirements. \n Treasury offset: An interception by the U.S. Department of the Treasury or a state agency of \nany payment of applicable federal funds (tax refunds, Social Security benefits, federal retirement benefits, etc.) or state funds otherwise due a borrower who has defaulted on a FFELP loan. \n Troubled debt restructuring (TDR) : A restructuring in which a bank, for economic or \nother reasons related to a borrower’s financial difficulties, grants a concession to the borrower that it would not otherwise consider. This includes a modification of the loan terms, such as a reduction of the stated interest rate, principal, or accrued interest or an extension of the maturity date at a stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for new debt with similar risk. \n U.S. Department of Education: The federal government agency that administers several \nfederal student financial aid programs, including the Federal Pell Grant, the Federal Work -\nStudy Program, the Federal Perkins Loans, the Federal Stafford Loans, and the Feder al PLUS \nLoans. William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program (Direct Loan Program ): A student loan \nprogram authorized in 1992 by Title IV, part D, of the HEA, as amended. The Direct Loan \nprogram offers four components: Direct Subsidized Stafford Loans, Direct Unsubsidized \nStafford Loans, Direct PLUS Loans, and Direct Consolidation Loans. The Direct Loan \nprogram is similar to the discontinued FFELP, except that loans are made by the Education \nDepartment rather than by private lending institutions. Appendixes > Appendix F \nComptroller’s Handbook 110 Student Lending Appendix F: Abbreviations \n \nALLL allowance for loan and lease l osses \n \nCDR cohort default rate \n \nCFPB Consumer Financial Protection Bureau \n CNBE Chief National Bank Examiner \n COA cost of a ttendance \n ECOA Equal Credit Opportunity Act \n EFC expected f amily contribution \n EFTA Electronic Fund Transfer Act \n EIC examiner -in-charge \n FAFSA Free Application for Federal Student Aid \n FCRA Fair Credit Reporting Act \n FDCPA Fair Debt Collection Practices Act \n FFELP Federal Family Education Loan Program \n FFIEC Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council \n FSA federal savings association \n GAAP generally accepted accounting principles \n GLBA Gramm –Leach –Bliley Act \n HCERA Health Care and Education Rehabilitation Act \n HEA Higher Education Act \n ICQ internal control questionnaire \n LIBOR London Interbank Offered Rate \n MIS management information systems \n Appendixes > Appendix F \nComptroller’s Handbook 111 Student Lending MLA Military Lending Act \n \nNSLDS –SSCR National Student Loan Data System –Student Status \nConfirmation Report \n OCC Office of the Comptroller of the Currency \n RCCP Retail Credit Classification and Account Management Policy \n ROE report of examination \n SCRA Servicemembers Civil Relief Act \n SSAE Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements \n TDR troubled debt restructuring \n TILA Truth in Lending Act \n UDAAP Unfair, Deceptive or Abusive Acts or Practices \n UDAP Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices References \nComptroller’s Handbook 112 Student Lending References \n \nLaws \n \n12 USC 24, “Corporate Powers of Associations” (national banks) \n12 USC 161, “Reports to Comptroller of the Currency” (national banks) \n12 USC 484, “Limitation on Visitorial Powers” (national banks) 12 USC 1461 et seq. , “Home Owners’ Loan Act ” (federal savings associations) \n15 USC 45, “Unfair Methods of Competition Unlawful” 15 USC 1601, et seq., “Truth in Lendin g Act ” \n15 USC 1681, et seq., “ Fair Credit Reporting Act” \n15 USC 1691, et seq., “Equal Credit Opportunity Act” 15 USC 1692, et seq., “ Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ” \n15 USC 6801, et seq., “ Gramm –Leach –Bliley Act” \n20 USC 1001 et seq., “Higher Education Act ,” Pub. L. No. 89-329, Title IV, part D \n50 USC 3901 et seq., “Servicemembers Civil Relief Act” \n“Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act,” Pub. L. No. 111-152, Title II, section 2201 \n \nRegulations \n 12 CFR 3, subpart C (12 CFR 3.20–3.22), “Definition of Capital” \n12 CFR 3, subpart D (12 CFR 3.30–3.63), “Risk- Weighted Assets –Standardized Approach” \n12 CFR 3, subpart E (12 CFR 3.100–3.173), “Risk- Weighted Assets –Internal Ratings -Based \nand Advanced Measurement Approaches” \n12 CFR 7, “Bank Activities and Operations” 12 CFR 21.11, “Suspicious Activity Reports” 12 CFR 30, “Safety and Soundness Standards” 12 CFR 128, “Nondiscrimination Requirements” (federal savings associations) \n12 CFR 160, “Lending and Investment” (federal savings associations) \n12 CFR 162, “Regulatory Reporting Standards” (federal savings associations) \n12 CFR 163.176, “Interest- Rate- Risk-Management Procedures” (federal savings \nassociations) \n \nComptroller’s Handbook \n \nExamination Process \n“Bank Supervision Process” \n“Community Bank Supervision” \n“Federal Branches and Agencies Supervision” \n“Large Bank Supervision” \n“Sampling Methodologies” \n \nSafety and Soundness, Asset Quality \n“Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses ” \n“Loan Portfolio Management” References \nComptroller’s Handbook 113 Student Lending “Rating Credit Risk” \n \nSafety and Soundness, Liquidity \n“Asset Securitization” \n Safety and Soundness, Management \n“Internal and External Audits” \n“Internal Control” \n \nConsumer Compliance \n“Fair Credit Reporting” \n“Fair Lending” \n“Other Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations” “Privacy of Consumer Financial Information” “Servicemembers Civil Relief Act” \n“Truth in Lending Act” \n \nOCC Issuances \n Advisory Letter 2000- 7, “Abusive Lending Practices” (July 25, 2000) \nAdvisory Letter 2002- 3, “Guidance on Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices” \n(March 22, 2002) \nAdvisory Letter 2003-2, “Guidelines for National Banks to Guard Against Predatory and \nAbusive Lending Practices” (February 21, 2003) \nCNBE Policy Guidance 2010-2 (REV), “Policy Interpretation: OCC Bulletin 2000-20—\nApplication to Private Student Lending” ( May 9, 2016) \nOCC Bulletin 1997-24, “Credit Scoring Models: Examination Guidance” (May 20, 1997) \n(not applicable to FSAs) \nOCC Bulletin 1999-10, “Subprime Lending Activities ” (March 5, 1999) \nOCC Bulletin 1999-15, “Subprime Lending: Risks and Rewards” (April 5, 1999) \n(not applicable to FSAs) \nOCC Bulletin 2000-3, “Consumer Credit Reporting Practices: FFIEC Advisory Letter” \n(February 16, 2000) \nOCC Bulletin 2000-20, “Uniform Retail Credit Classification and Account Management \nPolicy: Policy Implementation ” (June 20, 2000) \nOCC Bulletin 2001-6, “ Subprime Lending: Expanded Guidance for Subprime Lending \nPrograms” (January 31, 2001) \nOCC Bulletin 2001- 37, “Policy Statement on Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses \nMethodologies and Documentation for Banks and Savings Institutions : ALLL \nMethodologies and Documentation” (July 20, 2001) \nOCC Bulletin 2003-01, “Credit Card Lending: Account Management and Loss Allowance \nGuidance” (January 8, 2003) \nOCC Bulletin 2004-20, “Risk Management of New, Expanded, or Modified Bank Products \nand Services: Risk Management Process” (May 10, 2004) (national banks; for FSAs, refer to the OTS Examination Handbook , section 760) References \nComptroller’s Handbook 114 Student Lending OCC Bulletin 2006- 47, “Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (ALLL) : Guidance and \nFrequently Asked Questions (FAQ) on the ALLL” (December 1 3, 2006) \nOCC Bulletin 2011-12, “Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk Management” (April 4, 2011) \nOCC Bulletin 2011-16, “Servicemembers Civil Relief Act: Revised Examination \nProcedures” (May 3, 2011) \nOCC Bulletin 2012-10, “Troubled Debt Restructurings: Supervisory Guidance on \nAccoun ting and Reporting Requirements” (April 5, 2012) \nOCC Bulletin 2013-29, “Third -Party Relationships: Risk Management Guidance” \n(October 20, 2013) \nOCC Bulletin 2014-42, “Interagency Guidance Regarding Unfair or Deceptive Credit \nPractices” ( August 22, 2014) \nOCC Bulletin 2015-7, “ Interagency Guidance on Private Student Loans With Graduated \nRepayment Terms at Origination” (January 29, 2015) \n " }

[ -0.04105827212333679, 0.013269348070025444, 0.08279403299093246, -0.023247089236974716, -0.012361203320324421, 0.03351312503218651, 0.03807181492447853, -0.04361183941364288, -0.02147337608039379, 0.0034091041889041662, -0.07717280089855194, 0.01381560880690813, 0.05898914858698845, -0.06902683526277542, -0.03716106712818146, 0.1061210185289383, 0.028311368077993393, -0.09075765311717987, -0.028788920491933823, 0.12081839144229889, 0.09477595239877701, 0.08376336097717285, 0.02926522307097912, 0.05506845563650131, 0.05955114960670471, 0.0525689572095871, -0.026401815935969353, 0.024593684822320938, -0.08948306739330292, 0.040405359119176865, 0.055569712072610855, 0.02802412211894989, 0.030453337356448174, -0.007438582833856344, 0.07344581931829453, 0.044187646359205246, 0.03436530381441116, -0.015278751961886883, 0.027118736878037453, 0.04354515299201012, -0.005078176036477089, -0.01570037379860878, 0.039817724376916885, 0.08878083527088165, -0.07433900982141495, 0.020546574145555496, 0.07857699692249298, 0.03243115171790123, -0.0031649984885007143, 0.08081416040658951, 0.0063933138735592365, -0.030862493440508842, 0.037026070058345795, 0.012016062624752522, 0.011054075323045254, -0.016566529870033264, 0.006656325422227383, -0.024532945826649666, 0.022046754136681557, -0.01974552497267723, -0.01936774142086506, -0.001401379588060081, 0.010372812859714031, 0.01790672168135643, -0.05259837582707405, -0.06867069751024246, 0.06789621710777283, -0.019087154418230057, -0.1151333674788475, 0.01470146793872118, 0.018073419108986855, 0.12652331590652466, 0.0880424901843071, -0.021302565932273865, -0.012161600403487682, -0.021828457713127136, 0.06626841425895691, 0.0564667284488678, 0.11067071557044983, -0.08385530114173889, 0.04144761338829994, 0.008317429572343826, 0.03871435672044754, -0.06914949417114258, -0.004013916477560997, -0.034350574016571045, -0.05004504695534706, 0.001469186507165432, 0.02214723452925682, 0.028945308178663254, -0.04280573129653931, -0.02177043817937374, 0.061123646795749664, -0.03381797671318054, -0.020850960165262222, -0.001754320808686316, 0.011958625167608261, 0.04064685478806496, -0.03422632813453674, 0.06116808205842972, 0.059711214154958725, -0.0006568621611222625, -0.011856434866786003, -0.07608504593372345, 0.03900483250617981, -0.0009695332264527678, 0.012246735394001007, 0.055071696639060974, -0.07128477096557617, 0.034543003886938095, 0.04659489914774895, 0.0008001140085980296, -0.04281909018754959, 0.010916887782514095, 0.017172522842884064, 0.04027538374066353, -0.01831989735364914, -0.0762702003121376, 0.05048302561044693, -0.020812587812542915, 0.0055281673558056355, -0.0025491740088909864, -0.02184802107512951, -0.004868262447416782, 0.03757214546203613, -0.08426088839769363, -0.10791055858135223, 1.6246380689730138e-33, -0.006077294237911701, 0.0427977629005909, -0.03066098317503929, 0.03223889693617821, -0.10682032257318497, 0.01325350534170866, 0.018611125648021698, -0.0005917873932048678, -0.05888952314853668, -0.058964554220438004, -0.04128582403063774, 0.039077918976545334, 0.056681953370571136, 0.06430066376924515, -0.04793060943484306, -0.05788271129131317, -0.09703728556632996, 0.056277643889188766, 0.010199548676609993, -0.028691884130239487, 0.04562411457300186, -0.007519861217588186, 0.005114175379276276, -0.008401095867156982, -0.014586533419787884, -0.06364952772855759, 0.0520278699696064, -0.00581124983727932, -0.0614745207130909, 0.02625451236963272, -0.0372999906539917, 0.0012514095287770033, 0.08737032115459442, -0.07100195437669754, 0.02298850007355213, -0.0696311667561531, -0.013878053054213524, 0.0017741636838763952, -0.1068744957447052, -0.08776628226041794, 0.03972712904214859, 0.10591908544301987, 0.033028848469257355, 0.035869237035512924, -0.028092699125409126, -0.004376304801553488, 0.016588538885116577, 0.02487901784479618, -0.048970695585012436, -0.044171273708343506, 0.011648568324744701, 0.011015860363841057, -0.02260301634669304, -0.07445255666971207, -0.0319632850587368, -0.07884422689676285, -0.05526040866971016, -0.005095214117318392, -0.004892720375210047, -0.06428824365139008, 0.005146197509020567, -0.0005161060835234821, 0.010498869232833385, 0.054024700075387955, -0.09756946563720703, 0.017139866948127747, -0.08345489948987961, 0.05375196784734726, -0.003383639268577099, 0.005064668133854866, 0.028658980503678322, -0.05591374263167381, 0.05984586477279663, -0.01689806953072548, -0.10089369863271713, 0.05660437047481537, 0.053464002907276154, 0.01622784323990345, 0.03822357580065727, -0.022039851173758507, -0.01663472317159176, -0.04170593246817589, 0.008291412144899368, 0.04167070612311363, 0.035923246294260025, -0.023271404206752777, 0.046840403228998184, -0.02008761651813984, -0.023021699860692024, -0.001406857860274613, 0.03013729304075241, 0.010785876773297787, -0.016765236854553223, -0.09783835709095001, 0.019162492826581, -4.5502960203628576e-33, 0.0021343594416975975, 0.08398134261369705, 0.06191585585474968, -0.06049184128642082, -0.015528052113950253, -0.019207024946808815, 0.014826919883489609, -0.010481476783752441, -0.015845324844121933, -0.09410449862480164, 0.005662241019308567, 0.056332752108573914, -0.025550413876771927, 0.035491783171892166, -0.08972684293985367, -0.027497733011841774, 0.007141233887523413, -0.11098641157150269, 0.07036000490188599, -0.09565868973731995, -0.000412297755246982, 0.06050146371126175, 0.025852300226688385, 0.04233980178833008, -0.06393837928771973, -0.04059004783630371, 0.0380752868950367, 0.07057302445173264, 0.05816251039505005, 0.036591675132513046, -0.015849830582737923, -0.10491537302732468, -0.11603527516126633, 0.020018570125102997, 0.00745480228215456, 0.036516573280096054, 0.02310006506741047, -0.08089731633663177, -0.045948538929224014, -0.008339750580489635, 0.08841408789157867, -0.06529242545366287, -0.06850108504295349, 0.05458008497953415, -0.0463198684155941, -0.03391382843255997, -0.02596704661846161, -0.05884218588471413, -0.0017377157928422093, -0.0430075041949749, -0.05467098578810692, -0.04415461793541908, -0.0032847709953784943, 0.025900816544890404, -0.014852197840809822, 0.0879601314663887, 0.0056148418225348, 0.022490398958325386, 0.09189480543136597, -0.003249155590310693, -0.051438964903354645, 0.09306613355875015, -0.05471959710121155, -0.09155654907226562, 0.01376165822148323, -0.027915146201848984, -0.008441273123025894, -0.0413886159658432, -0.008634119294583797, 0.0661308541893959, -0.011139238253235817, -0.042063888162374496, -0.12612120807170868, -0.051696907728910446, 0.03842563182115555, 0.03438001871109009, 0.020391292870044708, -0.046802178025245667, -0.1029864028096199, 0.07860404253005981, 0.018893931061029434, -0.07291779667139053, -0.021967215463519096, -0.020118849352002144, 0.10699908435344696, -0.07152821123600006, 0.04762409254908562, 0.015878623351454735, -0.07210884988307953, 0.09214896708726883, -0.042152825742959976, -0.015768300741910934, -0.016746239736676216, -0.04435940831899643, -0.06237727031111717, -5.974842309797168e-8, -0.030930904671549797, 0.024312680587172508, -0.038270026445388794, 0.01686955615878105, 0.018057888373732567, -0.037778422236442566, -0.0590406209230423, -0.03306717425584793, 0.024684187024831772, 0.030012764036655426, 0.17038482427597046, 0.059512313455343246, -0.025855036452412605, -0.013393078930675983, -0.030105700716376305, 0.03745349496603012, -0.07632612437009811, -0.07216328382492065, -0.07238426059484482, -0.06596759706735611, -0.023641452193260193, 0.008912621065974236, -0.049921706318855286, 0.014697523787617683, 0.027165278792381287, 0.06032354757189751, -0.001112051191739738, 0.05041389539837837, 0.01693226583302021, 0.034158363938331604, -0.021116402000188828, 0.08454764634370804, -0.08480488508939743, -0.058074988424777985, 0.013829763978719711, -0.022130604833364487, -0.023389652371406555, 0.009463563561439514, 0.07234419137239456, -0.006072716787457466, -0.007225734647363424, 0.023780260235071182, -0.024972960352897644, 0.05280819535255432, 0.07659020274877548, 0.03088938258588314, -0.11523430049419403, 0.030382663011550903, 0.00969952717423439, -0.06225741654634476, -0.02048693783581257, -0.015999261289834976, -0.006480738986283541, 0.14287357032299042, 0.06182467192411423, -0.014634503051638603, -0.027733758091926575, 0.012168549932539463, 0.027788318693637848, 0.05970520153641701, 0.05611860752105713, -0.04860289767384529, -0.030767496675252914, -0.0564374104142189 ]

{ "pdf_file": "4NULTK4K27CEH4E6TCVCEHXAWVJJMWSX.pdf", "text": "2/15/2007 - Congressman Albio Sires Speech On Iraq War Policy Resolution\nFor Immediate Release                                                                       Contact: Olga Alvarez\n February 15, 2007         \n (201) 222-2828      \n \n (Washington, D.C.) - Today, Congressman Albio Sires gave the following speech on the floor\nof the House of Representatives during debate on H.Con.Res. 63, the Iraq War Policy\nResolution:\n  \n &quot;Madame Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution on behalf of the 32,000 men\nand women from my state of New Jersey and all the other servicemen and women that have\nbeen deployed since 9/11.  I am so proud of their sacrifice and service to our nation and I will\ncontinue to support them.  I'm standing in front of you as a product of the sacrifices our soldiers\nhave made in the name of liberty and freedom throughout the history of this country.  I also rise\non behalf of my constituents, the people of New Jersey and the people of this nation whose tax\ndollars are paying for this war in Iraq. \n \n &quot;Since the beginning of the war, $379 billion has already been appropriated and another\n$235 billion is slated for the upcoming supplemental appropriations.  We are currently spending\n$8 billion a month in Iraq and the American people are footing the bill.  All this money could\nhave been used to declare war on some of our domestic problems here at home such as\npoverty, improving our schools, ensuring access to health care, and investing in affordable\nhousing.  This money could have been used to invest in our children, our families, our veterans\nand our elderly.  But, it wasn't.  \n \n &quot;Instead, American taxpayers have also committed more than $38 billion to Iraq\nReconstruction.  About 33 percent of this money is targeted for infrastructure projects like roads,\nsanitation, water, electric power and oil production.  However, I am concerned that:\n \n - Only 25 percent of the Iraqi population has access to drinkable water. \n - Of 136 sanitation and water projects, only 49 are set to be completed. \n - Residents in Baghdad only have 4 and a half hours of electricity per day, and \n - Current oil production in Iraq is half of what it was prior to the war. \n \n &quot;Since the reconstruction projects started, the Coalition Provisional Authority can't\naccount for almost $9 billion of taxpayer money.  Every year, $4 billion is being lost because of\nlack of oversight.  There have also been many problems with poor project and quality\nmanagement.  For example:\n \n - The Baghdad Police College cost $75 million and was built without proper plumbing for\nwaste water. It has become a health and structural hazard. \n - The Basrah Children's Hospital is running $48 million over budget and is a year behind\nschedule. \n - And, after spending $186 million, Parsons has only 6 of 150 planned health care centers\ncompleted and only 14 more will be finished. \n 1 / 2 2/15/2007 - Congressman Albio Sires Speech On Iraq War Policy Resolution\n \n &quot;The list goes on and on.  Madame Speaker, the Iraqi government says $100 billion is\nneeded over the next 4 years to rebuild the country's infrastructure.  Madame Speaker, the Iraqi\nGovernment seems to think they have open access to U.S. dollars, because their government is\ncurrently sitting on $10 billion that could be used to help rebuild Iraq.  The Iraqi government and\nthe Iraqi people MUST take responsibility and help rebuild their country.  Our support is not\nopen-ended and neither are our tax dollars. \n &quot;Madame Speaker, I support this resolution and this debate because our troops and our\nconstituents can no longer afford to have this Congress support the Administration's failed Iraq\npolicies.  They FAILED to give us the necessary oversight for Iraq reconstruction efforts, they\nFAILED to listen to the advice of military commanders, they FAILED to listen to the American\npeople, and as a result, they FAILED to provide a plan for success in Iraq.\n \n &quot;Thank you Madame Speaker and I yield back the balance of my time.&quot;\n \n \n   \n 2 / 2" }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "SCXLRF5DK4NDSP4RXGJFZJMY5D6BK7MY.pdf", "text": " " }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "LUNHY35RQQVKLPEN2LP52XDOP3KFLWRO.pdf", "text": "" }

[ -0.06008114293217659, -0.029721450060606003, 0.028348837047815323, 0.007787307258695364, 0.00676178140565753, -0.041354164481163025, -0.013376849703490734, -0.030418636277318, -0.08778893947601318, -0.08853030949831009, -0.0437571182847023, 0.013667101040482521, 0.038011837750673294, -0.025129014626145363, 0.02716338448226452, 0.0793088972568512, 0.10607600957155228, 0.06937380135059357, 0.04712056368589401, -0.08831747621297836, 0.030113110318779945, 0.05186435952782631, 0.06699220836162567, -0.06794602423906326, 0.027213897556066513, 0.005485361907631159, 0.014020686969161034, -0.01936296373605728, -0.009496658109128475, -0.034337118268013, 0.02895350009202957, 0.08063109964132309, 0.04166648909449577, 0.09652047604322433, 0.05815422534942627, 0.034251533448696136, -0.01506885327398777, 0.03984180465340614, 0.02106621116399765, 0.0239923894405365, -0.11112049221992493, -0.05552667751908302, -0.0328923724591732, 0.03789575397968292, 0.019990937784314156, -0.015188422054052353, 0.012842677533626556, 0.02202477492392063, -0.042603105306625366, -0.004922636318951845, -0.10808115452528, -0.0613204725086689, 0.0442407950758934, 0.0070862723514437675, -0.07867564260959625, 0.03301834315061569, -0.0240250863134861, -0.02575860172510147, -0.06382886320352554, -0.012913890182971954, 0.009106159210205078, -0.020989885553717613, -0.08083187788724899, 0.0368402861058712, -0.02154630236327648, -0.0444248802959919, -0.033825840801000595, 0.015230889432132244, -0.013711638748645782, -0.18504860997200012, 0.0015849642222747207, 0.0323210172355175, -0.03902000933885574, 0.0822603851556778, 0.024642447009682655, 0.09101862460374832, -0.02522369474172592, 0.0037100366316735744, 0.04778504744172096, -0.06605680286884308, 0.027162909507751465, 0.007065782323479652, 0.011941466480493546, 0.09133251011371613, -0.024221988394856453, -0.06813796609640121, 0.01866694912314415, 0.05374437943100929, 0.01415333617478609, 0.010581547394394875, 0.03108600154519081, -0.12160331010818481, 0.008210452273488045, -0.02603418007493019, 0.03396281599998474, -0.01765395514667034, 0.014004857279360294, 0.035569317638874054, 0.051269374787807465, 0.04709950461983681, -0.03779268637299538, 0.020212505012750626, -0.014184813015162945, -0.06673452258110046, -0.052083928138017654, 0.01027331780642271, 0.041391052305698395, 0.05382204055786133, 0.061162788420915604, 0.022526314482092857, -0.000024982264221762307, -0.026373744010925293, -0.07556921243667603, -0.05010746046900749, -0.016821159049868584, -0.017055612057447433, -0.04603680595755577, -0.023931169882416725, -0.013110180385410786, 0.04021116718649864, -0.125675767660141, 0.07649805396795273, -0.07318540662527084, -0.015431937761604786, -0.01156575046479702, 0.002965844701975584, 0.0188020970672369, 5.821754423908415e-33, 0.09330626577138901, 0.0833761915564537, 0.020215719938278198, -0.009405246004462242, 0.00998149998486042, -0.023961983621120453, -0.06633377075195312, 0.010121194645762444, -0.009139605797827244, -0.0017183010932058096, -0.04122915491461754, 0.061401061713695526, -0.015417943708598614, 0.007300154305994511, 0.039692383259534836, 0.010355275124311447, -0.011439505964517593, 0.06048355624079704, 0.0009621187928132713, 0.05081186816096306, 0.044774822890758514, -0.06658453494310379, 0.001081231632269919, -0.0006141324993222952, 0.05597085505723953, 0.03570755198597908, -0.017278898507356644, 0.006965352687984705, 0.0465315505862236, 0.020923923701047897, 0.002133405301719904, -0.013998718932271004, 0.04755742847919464, -0.009457902051508427, 0.05895524099469185, -0.03798902779817581, -0.020386965945363045, -0.07503363490104675, 0.025885604321956635, -0.026370612904429436, -0.0737970769405365, 0.07443325966596603, 0.06326208263635635, -0.018254384398460388, 0.05212417244911194, -0.019377967342734337, 0.01345331221818924, 0.03203137591481209, 0.08822654187679291, 0.07999967783689499, 0.06626671552658081, 0.008211420848965645, -0.085433229804039, 0.03430318459868431, 0.008148452267050743, 0.061984989792108536, 0.03249634802341461, 0.01603873074054718, 0.1052178367972374, 0.10640798509120941, 0.0028990465216338634, 0.041405148804187775, 0.044725798070430756, -0.07256723940372467, 0.025343313813209534, -0.06514943391084671, 0.03657548874616623, 0.00995054841041565, 0.07056732475757599, 0.030490506440401077, -0.008882462047040462, 0.0029198697302490473, 0.044730931520462036, 0.019427411258220673, 0.024856822565197945, 0.009745101444423199, 0.00036962193553335965, -0.03314864635467529, -0.0025969031266868114, -0.0070711774751544, 0.02727353759109974, -0.04205680638551712, -0.00019144121324643493, -0.02086547575891018, 0.03610948473215103, -0.03669444099068642, 0.02454252727329731, -0.03653121739625931, 0.011050261557102203, 0.07862129807472229, 0.01867835782468319, 0.0033806227147579193, -0.14726726710796356, -0.006539363879710436, 0.012755485251545906, -4.8158629694166596e-33, -0.027433043345808983, -0.0886755883693695, -0.006061475723981857, -0.000687210529576987, -0.04232266917824745, -0.05533025786280632, 0.051145121455192566, -0.0012489536311477423, 0.031027454882860184, 0.0005324856610968709, -0.07068196684122086, -0.05243583768606186, 0.12337221950292587, -0.011217412538826466, -0.060742199420928955, -0.009158407337963581, -0.027837924659252167, 0.02176118828356266, -0.027125975117087364, 0.14962753653526306, 0.03579562157392502, 0.05357680842280388, -0.11935459822416306, 0.006031529046595097, 0.0477086678147316, 0.017504438757896423, -0.05375669151544571, -0.004696505144238472, -0.03284992650151253, 0.025633739307522774, -0.018175160512328148, -0.03674718737602234, -0.03949396312236786, -0.025938009843230247, -0.08067013323307037, -0.028577132150530815, 0.031799010932445526, 0.019732961431145668, -0.003083685413002968, 0.039979733526706696, 0.05016396939754486, 0.019365975633263588, -0.09925714880228043, -0.06966482847929001, -0.04614903777837753, -0.038845159113407135, -0.13491877913475037, 0.026809386909008026, -0.0214963611215353, -0.04657842963933945, 0.03500215709209442, 0.04662221670150757, -0.07596155256032944, -0.012648049741983414, 0.06330758333206177, -0.06659720838069916, -0.03793766349554062, -0.04760544374585152, -0.11754688620567322, -0.011946354992687702, -0.04958288371562958, 0.08427552878856659, 0.06310651451349258, 0.05483291298151016, 0.0798783078789711, -0.09926710277795792, -0.0302885789424181, 0.05437306687235832, -0.08273179829120636, -0.048949290066957474, 0.04839995503425598, -0.043777354061603546, -0.022801456972956657, -0.03206658735871315, -0.007729209028184414, 0.01777299866080284, 0.04468422010540962, -0.011865110136568546, -0.07023251801729202, 0.06995821744203568, -0.02469051629304886, -0.016768092289566994, 0.05176953971385956, 0.08664914220571518, 0.09218800067901611, 0.12574048340320587, -0.030091043561697006, -0.009891239926218987, 0.02678149752318859, 0.014003338292241096, -0.08238321542739868, 0.029696771875023842, -0.07957608252763748, 0.06894667446613312, -0.04965382441878319, -5.239746059260142e-8, -0.09562469273805618, 0.013509786687791348, -0.03429865464568138, 0.0712166354060173, -0.0027418741956353188, -0.028456836938858032, -0.026695549488067627, 0.09214770048856735, -0.05044490471482277, 0.019200608134269714, 0.04406066611409187, 0.038310445845127106, -0.08936633914709091, -0.007126187440007925, 0.05761153623461723, 0.07749245315790176, 0.03459635749459267, -0.04743571579456329, -0.009032298810780048, 0.03602731227874756, 0.04185180366039276, 0.09546530991792679, 0.014594925567507744, 0.07215557992458344, 0.061049673706293106, 0.007688832003623247, -0.06731127947568893, 0.04699573293328285, 0.012082129716873169, -0.04053130000829697, 0.030729373916983604, -0.010773264802992344, -0.023405972868204117, -0.09847129881381989, 0.10345572978258133, -0.05884930118918419, -0.03221075236797333, -0.0175046194344759, -0.039911579340696335, 0.026461131870746613, 0.06015951558947563, 0.06016075983643532, -0.05152221769094467, -0.011356249451637268, 0.07930339872837067, 0.026111086830496788, -0.032542210072278976, -0.04799925535917282, 0.007800457067787647, -0.04059567674994469, -0.038095872849226, -0.06218099966645241, -0.0549650676548481, 0.020064739510416985, 0.07960381358861923, -0.0110290152952075, -0.05475730821490288, -0.07910972833633423, 0.00945956353098154, 0.03829590231180191, 0.000541765009984374, -0.05073826014995575, 0.0008558065164834261, 0.02786288596689701 ]

{ "pdf_file": "JWYVYMU6FQRTYIQZNWUQRD3YV33OZTYE.pdf", "text": "New York State Department of Labor Technology Projects \n \n \nAlchemy Calais Open Source Natural Language Processing \nA proof of concept (PoC) was completed using ope n-source natural language processing technology to \nparse resumes, job opening descriptions (OSOS databa se), and training opportunity descriptions (ETP \ndatabase) and match, based on tagged metadata, an i ndividual’s resume with potential job and training \nopportunities. \n This PoC proved to be successful with approximat ely 70-80% accuracy on matching. We believe by \ncleaning the data we query against in our databases, and exploring alternative data repositories (using \ninformation from web sites like Monster.com for jo b listings and exploring additional training providers), \nwe can get the accuracy percentage much higher. We ’d also like to increase the robustness of the \napplication by adding mapping/geo-coding technology to allow for searching within a specified geographic \narea. (For example, available opportunities within 20 miles of a specified zip code). \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 Continued analysis of data sources to provide the most relevant \nsearch results for training and job opportunities began. Both Alchemy & Calais open-source natural \nlanguage processing tools have been utilized at this po int. Currently, our data sources to run against \nthese tools have been our own job listing and training pr ovider databases. Currently, we are exploring an \nexternal site to see if they offer a service that would allow us to sear ch a broader list of job listings. Geo-\nmapping technology is being explored to provide sear ch results for training or employment opportunities \nwithin a specific (e.g. 10, 25 or 50) mile radius from a specified zip code. \n \n \nApprenticeship Training Program Database \n The Apprenticeship Training Program currently has 2 separate Microsoft Access databases and paper \nfiles to manage the Apprenticeship Training Programs and Apprentices. This project would create one all \ninclusive secure, web-based, user-friendly, transactional, tracking and monitoring database. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 (Agile Development) \n \nSprint Name: Sprint 1: Applicant Management: Time line (8 weeks) Started: 7/26/2010, Planned End Date: \n9/17/2010, Timeline Status: On Schedule \n \nSprint 1 Overview: Applicant Management \n Update the Product Backlog \n Complete Detail Business Requirements (Business Process Model, Use Cases, GUI \nSpecification, Data Specification, Business Rules), \n Complete Detail Technical Requirements (Architecture Overview Diagram, System Domain \nModel, Service Model, User Role Management Requirements), \n Complete Design (GUI, Data, Application Servic es, Database Tables, Trade Database Table(s)) \nand Development (GUI, Applicant Managemen t Tables. Trade Database Table(s)). \n \nStatus Summary \n Product Backlog: The Lead BA started his QA re view of the updated backlog. The project team \nperformed a QA review of the backlog on Fr iday, 8/20. Updates are being finalized and the \nCustomer should receive the updated version next week. \n Detail Business Requirements: Use Cases, Requirements Specifications and Business Rules are \nin draft development. \n First drafts of the Add Applicant is complete , however there is an open architecture question \npertaining to Add Applicant regarding how to handl e Employer profile services from Labor Online. \nAdditional analysis is required  The Edit Applicant, Search Applicant and Dele te Applicant Use Cases are near completion and \nwill be forwarded tomorrow to the Lead BA to begin the review. Team deliverable walkthrough's on the Use Cases should begin late next week or early the following week. \n Development of the screen flow diagram is in process and being done in parallel to the Use Case \nreview. \n The first draft of the Trade Data dictionary was completed and the detail requirements and \nspecifications are in progress. \n The GUI Specifications are in progress. The Search Page is complete. The Add Applicant, Add \nContact and Modify Contact will be completed this week. \n \nDetail Technical Requirements: \n Analyzing technical requirements to Design and Implement Trade Database Tables is 20% \ncomplete. \n Domain and Service Model design for ATP Applicant Management is 20% complete. \n Design of the High Level Architecture Overview diagram is 10% complete. \n Development: Development of the GUI template (F onts, Menus, color palette, tabs, etc, per DOL \nstandards) is in progress. A team review is scheduled for Monday. \n \nSprint Accomplishments this Week: \n First drafts of all Use Cases will all be completed. \n Lead BA review of the Product Backlog will be completed. \n Development of the first draft of the GUI template will be completed. \n The Trade data dictionary was completed. \n Project Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None to repor Asset Center Upgrade \n \nThis project is proposed to enhance the Department of Labor’s Asset Management system in order to gain new functionality that will bette r meet users’ requirements an d to obtain previously included \nfunctionality that was lost in an earlier upgrade. There are additional reasons to enhance the Asset \nManagement system: the inventory system has never ac hieved its promised efficiencies; redundant data \nentry wastes valuable Department of Labor resources; the current system does not allow for edits to a \nrequest once submitted; there is no standardized desc ription field, making it impossible to sort and track \nby item description; and the asset catalog nee ds to be updated and made more extensive. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 05/25/10 Responses were received from the Bid. They are being scored and \nwill then be returned to Purchase for review. \n \n \nBuilding 12 Server Room Upgrade \n The New York State Department of Labor Technical Services group (NYSDOL TS) is working with the \nNew York State Department of Labor Property Office (NYSDOL PO) to determine whether to keep the \nBuilding 12 server room in Basement Room #4 (BD-4) or move to Basement Room #6 (BD-6, Northwest \ncorner of the building). Basement Room 15 was an option but was removed from consideration when NYSDOL PO informed the team that there is periodic water damage in the room. \n \nThe goal is to refresh the physical plant resource s supporting the development computing environment. It \nis necessary to provide a more robust and secure si te that allows flexibility for fu ture growth. Once this is \nin place the project can be closed out. Thereafter work w ill be tracked in the Keep projects within \nTechnical Services. Current Status Report: 08/20/10 First phase of project is marked as complete. OGS has accepted the \nproject and assigned the engineer. DOL property has re ceived first cut of estimate and is reviewing \n \n \nChange Management for IT Service Management (ITSM) \n \nThis project was created to develop and implement a Change Management ITSM process which will ensure that standardized methods and procedures ar e used for efficient and prompt handling of all \nchanges. \n Current Status Report: 06/24/2010 WE met with the Release Management Team to gather their \nrequirements for Change Management workflow. The team will need to meet again once the project \nresource returns from vacation. \n \nProject is further delayed because we are unable to migrate to the needed version of Footprints. While Footprints can run on the server and operating syst em levels in the environment, it cannot be deployed \nusing the current and probably unsupported SQLServe r 2000 environment. We cannot go forward with \nany Footprints deployments until the Database Ad ministration team can create a SQLServer 2008 \nenvironment for us. \n \nWorkflows and their status: \nWorkflow\n Status \nWSRR EPAS added additional requirements to their workflow, and additional \ndata items. \nProject Request Received list of authoriz ed requestor list from BACS; configuring \nworkflows. Advised that the workfl ow is changing for UI requests; \nsent current workflow to Eric Goldberg and Pat LaPlante for their requirements changes. \nDatabase Met with Database representa tives to document their workflow \nDeployments/Release Management Met with architects to discuss their requirements \nLDAP requests Part of new User maintenance project \nUser Maintenance Skeleton built in user maintenance/IRR project for security reasons. \nVPN requests Need to create Visio diag ram for the various type of VPN requested \n \nContact Center Implementation \n \nThe New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) is a leader in providing integrated customer service \nto jobseekers, workers and employers in the highly competitive workforce of the 21st century. The \nDepartment fulfills its mission thro ugh a wide variety of activities that revolve arou nd the needs of \nemployers and workers. \n \nThe Department: \n Administers the Unemployment Insurance Progra m, which provides temporary financial support \nfor those who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. \n Provides employment-related informatio n and job search assistance services. \n Provides training programs and retraining programs for workers displaced by technology change \nor foreign competition. \n Enforces regulations designed to minimize hazards in the workplace. \n Works with the private sector to create job opport unities for the labor force and to meet employer \nneeds for qualified workers. \n Enforces the State Labor Law to prevent the exploitation of workers, including minors and \nimmigrant workers. \n Protects the safety of the pub lic on ski tows, amusement rides and in places of public assembly.  Regulates the handling of asbestos to protect both workers and the general public. \n Provide accurate and timely data on present and future economic trends affecting the people of \nthe state. \n Works as a cooperating agency in the Federal/S tate labor market information statistical \nprograms. \n Much of the information regarding the above services and regulations is not easily accessible to New \nYorkers. To facilitate the prov ision of services and enforcement of regulations, the Department has \ninitiated an effort to create a centralized customer Contact Center. The purpose of the new Contact \nCenter is to communicate information regarding prog ram opportunities, instructions concerning NYSDOL \nregulations, and general statistical informati on with regard to Department programs. \n \nThe communication channels that will be administered are: \n Telephone \n Email \n Web Chat \n Online Ticketing \n \nCurrent Status Report : 8/20/2010 Customer update meeting was co nducted by status report and scrum. \n Staffing: The Training department continues to wo rk on their strategic approach for the training \ncurriculum and for the learning env ironment approach. Approvals for staffing are still with Civil \nService. \n Facilities: The room availability is still estimated at the end of August. \n Equipment: We know that we will need headphones but not telephones. We may need chairs, \nsupplies, and other start up items. We will review the hardware. We know we will have to scrub \nthe current computers and re-image them to the Contact Center requirements. \n Telephony: The budget requests have been submitt ed and are awaiting processing. The work for \nsetting up the call management process will commence following the analysis completion on 9/15. \n Software: this remains the same from last week due to vacations with the business analyst. \n Analysis: Interviews for the analysis continue. Target date for the completion of the analysis is \nSeptember 15th. \n \n \nCOOP Emergency Notification System \n The Continuity of Operations Plans (COOP) for the Department of Labor and its Divisions require an \nemergency notification system that will allow the D epartment to promptly contact affected employees \nduring or outside of work hours in the event of an emergency which may impact on their job location. The \nCOOPs also require rosters of employees on em ergency management teams with updated contact \ninformation. \nThe Department currently does not have employee home contact information available electronically. \n The Department plans to ut ilize NY-Alert system for emergency notific ation to its employees. NY- Alert is \noperated by the NYS Emergency Management Office ( SEMO) at no cost to NYS agencies. Under NY-\nAlert, DOL personnel authorized by management will hav e the capability to send emergency messages to \nemployees which will be sent immediately and simultaneo usly to employees at each mode of contact that \nemployees have provided. An MOU between DOL and SEMO is in process. \n This project will set up a process internally to co llect the information and pr ocess any updates. This \ninformation can then be provided electronically to NY-Ale rt for integration into that system. The employee \ndata will only be utilized for sending emergency mess ages by DOL management and NY-Alert when that \nsystem is operative. \n Current Status Report: 8/26/10 We sent a follow-up email to the vendor to see when the data will be \nloaded from the spreadsheet that we sent. They ar e validating the data and will let us know when they \nplan to load it into the application. The order form for NY-Alert is being reviewed and we will follow up \nwith Counsel's office for final sign o ff. Instructions are being written up for the staff who will be notifiers \nin NY-Alert. Two test groups have been set up in NY-Alert and emergency management staff are \nfamiliarizing themselves with the system. A st atus meeting was held wi th the customer. \n \n \nCustomer Verification Service with Department of Motor Vehicles \nCurrently the Department of Labor (DOL) has an Oracle database stored procedures solution to query the \nDepartment of Motor Vehicles (DMV) when claimant s apply for Unemployment Insurance benefits. The \ncurrent solution was architected in 1997 when the DOL opened the Telephone Claim Centers. The \nsolution is running on old technology (hardware and software) and we have experienced several \ninfrastructure failures at the DMV data center ov er the last 6 months. These failures have caused \ndisruption to the DOL UI Claims taking operations . DOL and DMV would like to refactor the current \nsolution to a web-services solution that can be reused with multiple applications and customers who may \nneed to consume/share this service. DOL specifically is interested in modernizing the solution to improve \nthe performance and reliability of the technical inte rface to the DMV information thus improving the \nworkflow and processing of UI Claims that require DMV information for customer identity verification. \n Current Status Report: 08/20/10 The MOU is in the mail. It needs to be sent to DMV and then back to \nDOL with the correct signatures. The staging envir onment is having a firewall issue. A request was \nmade to OFT to open the port on the firewall. \n \n \nData Sharing Assessment Project \n The purpose of this project is to develop an analysis report for data sharing with other New York State \ngovernmental entities, and to implement data sharing begi nning with the New York State Insurance Fund. \nThe New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) is responsible for a variety of programs, including \nWorker Protection, Unemployment Insurance, Em ployment Services, and Workforce Development. \nInformation from these programs is collected and ma intained by various divisions in the department. \nMany other governmental entities may find this informat ion useful in that it c ould serve to decrease costs \nand improve service by simplifying their operations a nd improving data quality. NYSDOL information may \nassist other governmental entities to verify the existence, location a nd status of employers, employees \nand other program participants. This information could be used to facilitate eligibility determination for \nvarious other New York State programs, licenses and permits. \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 There has been little progress on MOU. DOL counsel office has sent \nquery on use of Data. NYSIF have to respond back. Counse l office is still waiting to hear the use of data. \nCounsel's office suggested that the technical team should not start sharing the data unless the MOU is \nsigned. Team is working on getting a MOU in place between NYSIF and DOL. \n Data Warehouse: Federal Reporting \n \nThe Data Warehouse Federa l Reporting project will ensure that the Unemployment Insurance Federal \nreports, the Employment & Training Administration (ETA) Series, are produced from the Data Warehouse \ninstead of being produced from multiple data sources. It will also ensu re that the reports are accurate \nsince the report data items will be calcul ated using the single source of data. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 This week, activities focused on Employment and Training \nAdministration (ETA) Federal report ETA 5159. We have completed the coding of the work share report \nsegment and have updated EUC report segment with t he new employer numbers. Next week we expect to publish new report values for validation and to comp lete the business requirements for the work share \nreport segment. \n \n \nDisaster Recovery \n \nThere currently is no implemented Di saster Recovery (DR) plan or env ironment in place at New York \nState Department of Labor (NYSDOL). A DR plan has been created in December of 2008 for the \npurposes of implementation but has not been exec uted. Audits have been performed that have found \nNYSDOL to be non-compliant with ensuring the appropria te back up of existing servers and applications. \n \nThere are two paths being followed on this project in parallel: \n \nNYSDOL is working with the New York State Depa rtment of Labor Property Office (NYSDOL PO) to \ndetermine the cost and terms associated with placin g the DR site in the Glendale building #7 facility \nlocated outside of Binghamton, NY. \nOne of the IBM Power6 595s purchased through the UNIX project will be used for the \nDevelopment/Testing/DR environment in BD-4. It w ill initially be set up to prototype what the DR \nenvironment will look like. A decision will be made late r in the process to see if the configured P6 595 will \nbe moved down to Glendale or if a new server will be purchased. \nThe goal is to set up the DR facility with the appr opriate network, HVAC, Power, Data Circuits and \nNetwork Security Devices; as well as procure the hardware (Servers, Voice Cards, PBX) to ensure the \ncontinued operation of the UI Benefits Claims, SOA, and select Legacy systems. The project will be \nclosed once these are in place. Thereafter work w ill be tracked in the Keep projects within Technical \nServices. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 A project Review was held for this project and it was decided that this \nproject will be put on hold until Technical Services is able to hire someone who has done disaster \nrecovery implementations. This resource will become the project manager. The PTP is at OFT. Work \nwill not wait until OFT DR site is identified and available. It will resume upon hiring of the technical expert. \n \n \nDocument and Correspondence Management \n \nFor a very long time, DOL’s business has been very paper and image-based. As time progresses and we move towards communicating with our customer via multiple channels (web, email, snail mail/paper) the \nneed to identify a solution for management of a complex document/correspondence environment \nbecomes very important. \nDocument and Correspondence Management is a project to identify all the different types of content that \nDOL uses today (many produced from disparate prod ucts/sources). Additionally, we need to categorize \nall content. These content categories would be woul d be: mass-printed letters (1-way communication to \nDOL customer); one-off letters (printed one at a time; 1-way communication); forms (applications for \ncertain licenses or programs that we need to pres ent both electronically & in paper formats; 1-way \ncommunication from a customer to DOL); questionnaire s (questionnaires sent to employers & claimants \nduring the adjudication process; 2-way communication between DOL and a customer). \n One way communication to a DOL customer (one-off or mass printed) should use our existing xPression \nsolution, and the standards around how to do this must be adhered to. The overall \nDocument/Correspondence Standards will be part of th is project. (although there are currently existing \nusage documentation for xPression, which should be used and will be incorporated into this standard \nwhen it is produced for this project) \n \nFor 2-way communication between DOL & a customer (forms & questionnaires), the solution will be \nidentified and implemented as part of this project. Current Status Report: 08/13/10 The project team and the EPAS functional manager met on 8/9 to \ndiscuss project requirements and scope. The lead analyst produced a list of requirements pulled from a \nUISIM document. They were reviewed in an 8/12 meeting and the team chose the ones that were \napplicable to the project. \n \nEA Foundational Services \n In a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA), small com puter programs called services are orchestrated into \ncomposite applications that provide many different functions to end users. These services can be \ncategorized many ways and provide many different ty pes of capabilities. At Labor we often look at our \nservices in four basic layers. The first layer is Foundational Services, which deals with things like \nworkflow, error-message-handling, logging, routing, caching, and notifications. It is expected that New \nYork State’s SOA based modernization effort will be gr eatly accelerated so it is now essential that the \nfoundational services be completed based on industry and Labor specific standard s, best practices and \npatterns. \n \nFour foundational services in particular will be addr essed. Workflow, GUI Framework, Correspondence \nManagement and Document Management will be the focus of this project, based on their criticality and \nthe amount of work remaining to complete them. \n Tasks involved in this project would include: \n Final design for each foundational service. The primary high level design documents have been \ncompleted. The first goal of the project team w ill be to complete deeper level design so that the \ndevelopment sprints may be initiated. This ma y require additional requirements gathering from \nthe CAD teams that will be consuming these services \n Develop each foundational service. Development w ill be carried out in an agile, iterative fashion. \nSufficient design will have been conducted to devel op each service, and the CAD teams will have \nthe opportunity to review deliverables regularly , and requirements and design will be adjusted as \nneeded. \n Testing of each foundational service. Testing at the end of each delivery cycle will ensure that the \ndevelopment teams are meeting the requirements of the Composite Application Development \n(CAD) teams. Testing will include unit testing, to demonstrate that each module produces the \nexpected outputs. Integrat ed tests will make certain that each service behaves as expected when \ninteracting with all pieces of a composite applic ation. Finally, performance testing will assess the \nservice’s capacity to perform at acceptable leve ls under the duress of high levels of concurrent \ntransactions. \n Deployment. Once the testing of each foundatio nal service is complete, the service will be \npromoted to the Production environment. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/10 The Customer meeting was conducted this week. Workflow Deliverable \n- the Trust Association Interceptor (TAI) license has passed from Finance and has gone to the vendor. \nFinal testing in the DEV environment should be completed next week. \n ECM for Worker's Comp \nThis project will take existing documentation that is currently maintained in hard copy and store it \nelectronically within the ECM reposito ry. Users will be given the means to import new data as it arrives. \nUsers will use a web interface to ac cess stored data. Initial use will be limited to the personnel unit but \nmoving forward access could be afforded to authorized users for access to predefined views; a claimant \nto view their case file, for instance. Additionally, this project will look to utilize the workflow capabilities of \nECM in an attempt to streamline the Workers Compensation process. \n \nThe implementation of this project will provide increas ed security of sensitive per sonnel documentation as \ndata will now be password protected. Access will be lim ited to specific users with predefined rights. In addition, there is an expectation of improvement in both accuracy and ex pediency as the risk for human \nerror is greatly reduced. Electronic files are far le ss susceptible to loss, damage or misplacement then \nthe current hard copy system. ECM can alert users when a document has lingered longer than what is \nconsidered acceptable thereby greatly reducing t he chances for accidental oversights. Finally, \nimplementation will significantly limit the amount of paper required to accommodate the unit’s tasks. \nEffectively reducing paper, printer and toner costs as electronic versions of documentation are available \nfor use and reuse. \nCurrent Status Report: 08/13/2010 (COTS Package Install and Configuration) \n Sprint Name: Sprint 1 - Design, Timeline Status : Behind Schedule (Ahead of Schedule, On Schedule, \nBehind Schedule, Blocked, On-Hold) \n \nSprint 1 Overview: Define Item types and ACL's \n Deliverable Status: \n \nStatus Summary: We have discovered that the looks ups we deem necessary to make the product useful \nto the user are not supported by the front end (webi) that has been provided. We have to gather more \ninformation at this point both from IBM and our own research to determine whether our assumptions of \nthe front end are incorrect or if not do we need to expand the project and create our own front end - which \nwould require additional resources. \n \nSprint Accomplishments this Week: Discovered that wh ile we can connect to the necessary tables and \nthe API's exist to retrieve this data the supplied front end does not seem capable to receive the data. \n \nProject Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None to Report Eligible Training Provider List Rewrite \n The New York State Eligible Training Provider List (NYS-ETPL) was established in compliance with Title \n1, Section 122 of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998. The purpose of the ETPL is to re-write the \nexisting application to present a broad and diverse se lection of training choices to support employment \ngoals of individuals. \nThe following revisions, upgrades and additions to the current ETPL website must be made: \n The site needs to be given the ability to rapidly identify and categorize priority training offerings at \nthe State, Regional and Local levels. The method for doing this should also identify the sector \nthe training relates to and identify which are consider ed “Priority Sectors” at the State, Regional \nand Local levels. \n The current search function does not produce complete/correct results and must be updated and \ncorrected. \n An upgrade in the ability to report on performance information is necessary. \n Connectivity between the site and the One Stop Operating System (OSOS) needs to be \nestablished. \n A crosswalk created between the Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) codes with SOC \ncodes should be created. \n The site needs to provide NYSDOL Administrative Access. \n Current Status Report: 08/20/10 (Agile Development Project) \n \nProject Status: The goal of the project is to sunset the existing ETP online application, that was created \nin ASP with a SQL server backend, and replace it wi th an updated web based app lication with an Oracle \nbackend. The new application can be broken down into 4 modules; Training Provider (TP), Workforce \nInvestment Board Administration (WIB A), NYS DOL Ad min (NYS DOL A), and Job Seeker Search (JS). \nThe following overview details the progression through the sprints with anticipated timeframes: \n Training Provider Sprints - 4 months (August 2009 through December 2009 - Done) \n WIB Admin Sprints - 4 months (January 2010 through May 2010 - In Progress*) \n NYS DOL Admin Sprints - 2 months (May 2010 through June 2010) \n Job Seeker Sprint - 1 month (July 2010) \n Production/Go-Live (August/September 2010) \n \n*The WIB Admin sprint was pushed out by a mont h. Sprint 4 accounted for the New Provider \nRegistration, New Offerings, Manage Local List, and Crit ical Changes services. Sprint 5 will account for \nthe Notification, Outside Offerings, Comment Histor y, and WIB Work Queue for Pending Edits Approvals. \nSprint 6 will account for the Subsequent Eligibility work. \n \nSprint Name: Data Migration; Timeline (4 week s), Started: 8/16/2010, Planned End Date: 9/10/10, \nTimeline Status: On Schedule, (Ahead of Schedule, On Schedule, Behind Schedule, Blocked, On-Hold) \n \nSprint Accomplishments this Week: \n Completed changes to Contact service. \n Completed changes of adding Course type field on Course details page. \n Completed set up for Application Logging. \n Work in Progress on Data migration. \n Testing and bug fixes. \n Scrum sessions daily. \n Conducted Customer Representative status meeting. \n Project impediments impacting progress and actions to mitigate: 1. We need OFT LDAP web service \nURL to associate Role to Training provider users. \n Emergency Unemployment Compensation Expansion \n \nThe project will plan for and implement the ex pansion of Emergency Unem ployment Compensation \n(EUC), the implementation of Ex tended Benefits (EB), and the implem entation of Federal Additional \nCompensation (FAC - $25 weekly UI supplement). \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 Changes for the cu toff of Tier IV eligibility were tested and \nimplemented Thursday night. Changes were also installed to allow Shared Work EUC payments to \ncontinue. Our weekly meeting wi th UID was held on Thursday. \n \n \nEnterprise Release Management \nThe Enterprise Release Management Project will encompasses the current Change Management \nenvironment which consists of Rational Clear Case and Clear Quest, new SOA application/services build \nand release disciplines and SOA applicati on/services deployment preparation. \n \nThe current Rational environment needs to be modified in order to align with an enterprise build and \nrelease strategy. The build and release strategy will consist of creating a set of best practices using \nvarious tools to create an automated build and rele ase process for all the current environment’s \nInformation Technology projects to use. This needs to be done because of the many SOA projects going \non at one time. This creates a need to organize the build and release disciplines, rather than have 10 -15 or more SOA projects performing their own build and releases, which is causing wasted time and \nconfusion among all projects. \n Current Status Report: 08/20/10 Team completed development of ClearCase process document. \nRational team reviewed document second time for the changes it suggested. Team also met with build \nteam to explain the project objective. \n \n \nFederal Tax Offset \nThis project will provide the means for the State of New York to co llect benefit over payments through \nparticipation in the Treasury Offset Program (TOP). Participation in TOP is expected to assist in \ncollecting over $169 million in benefit overpayment s from 134,600 open benefit collection cases. \nLeverage the existing Statewide Offset Program (SWOP) coding and process to the greatest degree \npossible. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 Program Management \n Project Schedule: Start Date: 4/23/2010 Planned End Date: 12/24/2010 Timeline Status: On Schedule \n \nProject Description: Develop a data warehouse extr act as the source data for sending claimant records \nto a mailing vendor to print UC TOP Claimant letters, mail UC TOP letters to Claimants, establish \nagreements with and develop initial data file and updat e process with the US Treasury, build back-end \ntracking and update process at NYS DOL. \nStatus Summary: Envelopes for the Claimant mailings were received and samples were forwarded to the \nvendor for alignment set up and testing. UID resources are resetting the type 6 records in legacy so they \nwill be picked up and refreshed in the data warehouse. UID intends to complete the reset by close-of-\nbusiness on Wednesday to enable the data to be picked up on the extract for the warehouse. The final \nwarehouse extract run is planned for Friday August 27th; one business day earlier than planned to allow \nfor reruns if required. A meeting was held betw een Legacy, Database and the UI Customer to discuss a \nproposed solution for establishing the TOP flag in the legacy system. The suggested approach is being \nimplemented and a test file was generated and forwarded to the legacy technical resource. The customer status meeting was held. \n \nSprint Accomplishments This Week: \n Claimant envelops were received and a sample was forwarded to the vendor. \n Consensus was reached on the mainframe flag se tting approach. Changes to the system were \nstarted. \n UID started the reset of the type 6 records. \n \nProject Impediments Impacting Progress and/or Risks to Mitigate: None to report. \n Forms Review and Revision \n \nAll computer generated forms will be reviewed and re vised to the extent possible to eliminate the \npossibility of information security breaches. \n The unnecessary printing of PPSI (personal, private and sensitive in formation) on the forms will be \neliminated. Particular attention will be given to PPSI on duplexed and multi-page forms. Where use of \nthe social security number cannot be eliminated, consid eration will be given to using only the last four \ndigits. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 No activity - still awaiting UI D's review of the sample of LO 443's \nmailed for one day. \nHR Personnel-LATS \nThe HR Personnel-LATS project is an effort to reengineer, develop and implement a modern Human \nResource/Personnel and Time and Attendance syst em for the NYS Department of Labor. The new \nsystem will function as a single integrated Huma n Resource Management ( HRM) system (Personnel, \nTime and Attendance). It will interface directly with systems at the various control agencies so that \ncentralized data entry can be avoided. The new system will provide a user interface that is easy to use \nand understand. It will offer built in capability for user defined ad hoc reports to enhance the management capabilities offered by the system. T he new system will be well established and tested by \nother agencies. The current HR systems in use today are mainframe based systems that have been \nexpanded and enhanced many times ov er the years to address functionality issues as well as \nrequirements placed on us by the NYS Office of the St ate Comptroller, NYS Department of Civil Service, \nand the NYS Division of the Budget. As a result of this steady stream of enhancements and new \nrequirements, these systems are in need of an overh aul. The resulting system should meet all the needs \nof the control agencies as well as provide the NYS Department of Labor with a more cohesive and user \nfriendly system for the staff in the Administrative Finance Bureau and Human Resources, as well as the \nemployees throughout the agency that use these systems routinely. \n \nThe first phase of this project is to do data gat hering regarding the current HRM systems. The NYS \nDepartment of Labor is identifying the connection points between its legacy HRM systems and other \napplications. A description of the data that is sent into the HRM system and what is retrieved is being \ndocumented to be used to complete the Fit-Gap with an inter-agency hosted \"commercial off the shelf\" \nsolution. \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 Interfaces - The unexpected results of our interface testing were \nsent to the vendor. The vendor requested copies of t he files that were generated by the web services. \nThe files from both tests were sent. The developer continues to make changes to programs that use \nleave codes so that they will work properly when we sw itch to the new application. An inquiry was made \nabout a couple of reports to see if t hey are still being used. A (mainframe) software install to allow us to \nutilize a more secure file transfer process is schedul ed for 8/20. Technical Services will notify us when \nwe can begin testing, hopefully the first week of September. \nCustomer Testing - Completed a review of the interf ace testing, compiled and sent information to the \nvendor about the unexpected results. \nA status meeting was not held, but a written update was sent to the group. The heads of HR and the \nAdministrative Finance Bureau were sent a copy of the status report. \n \nIdentity Management \n \nNew York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) will develop standardized identity management services. \nThe design, development and implementation of these serv ices and service strategy will take into account \nthe various hardware platforms and software systems currently in use at NYSDOL. The services will \nprovide a single point of reference for collection of the user identification informati on (initial registration), \nassignment of access keys (ID, password), user ro les and access authorization. The services will be \ndesigned for use by all NYSDOL users, both internal and external. We will partner with the Office for Technology (OFT) and other state agencies to impl ement the solution in such a way that it may be \nextended and reused by all New York State agencies. This enterprise approach will improve the user \nexperience, improve information security, and increa se the effectiveness and efficiency of both person \nand systems resource utilization. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 The Customer week ly meeting was conducted. \n \nInternal Workers: The development work continues. The timing is being extended for development due to \nunforseen complexities. \nCommon Authentication for Employers: Regression testing is being completed. Implementation planning \ncontinues. Training and procedure development is un derway. Current test co de was elevated to the \nproduction environment on August 17th. \nStatewide Effort: A proposal continues for approving Labor's process of authenticating a claimant for \nbenefits as a trust level 2 authentication processes is being drafted. This will first need to be approved by \nUID and Office of Counsel before being submitted to the Statewide IdM Governance Board. \n \nExternal work force: Work on the architectura l recommendation is underway and should be completed \nnext week. This will be presented in the Senior Management Meeting for review and discussion. \n \n \nImplement Integrated AIX TWS with zOS TWS \nImplement an integrated Tivoli Workload Scheduling (TWS) system that will allow DOL to manage and \ncoordinate open system server based batch jobs from a centralized location. As data is migrated from \nmainframe based solutions (software and data struct ures) to server (AIX, MS Windows and other) based \nsolutions, it is increasingly import to manage the c oordination of batch executed server processes (batch \njobs) in a coordinated fashion. It is also important that we be able to setup and execute a sequence of \ndefined processes with both regular (daily, weekly , monthly) and irregular frequency (on demand) and \nalso to stop the execution of proc esses in the event of batch failure s and to send error notification for \nimmediate action and/or result reporting and automated notifications . These features of batch scheduling \nand management are well established on the z/OS TWS system and we need to implement a similar \nscheduler for open systems based processes. A propos ed solution would be one that leveraged the z/OS \nTWS system to manage the sequencing and coordination of the server jobs (since we already have an \nestablished Production Control environment and relationshi p with OFT for support). To do this we believe \nwe need an AIX based TWS node implemented to integrate the z/OS TWS environment. \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 Requirements gathering is un derway. A consolidated list of current \nbatch processes is being created. Team sent the requirem ent for purchase of the tool to tech services. \n \nInformation Classificati on Implementation \nAn Information Classification effort w ill establish levels of classification fo r all information assets within the \nNew York State Department of Labor and orderly and sy stematically assign each asset to an appropriate \nlevel of security control. \n Pursuant to the Federal Information Security Manage ment Act (FISMA), New York State Department of \nLabor must comply with Information Classification requirements as specified by Federal Information \nProcessing Standards (FIPS) publication 199. \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/10 Database staff continue pe rforming data discovery operations. The \nprocess of data discovery allows the classification tools to read the metadata of available data sources. \nTo that metadata we will add fields for classification. InfoSphere Implementation \n \nIn order to help speed the analysis, cleansing and mo vement of data from legacy systems to modernized \nsystems, we purchased the InfoSphere Su ite of Tools. In order to realize the functionality available in this \nset of tools, we need to create a strategy for the implementation and continuous use of these products. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 Some space issues have come up within the product and the team is \ninvestigating why this is happening. At the momen t, the address normalization service is not deployed and is a block for another project trying to integrate it into one of our legacy applications. The team will \ncontinue to work to resolve these issues and does no t foresee a detrimental block for any one team. \n \n \nJob Zone OSOS Connectivity \n \nJob Zone OSOS Connectivity is a project intended to create a data bridge between the two applications \nwhich will allow real time or near real time data sharing. Customers registered in OSOS would have \naccounts created in Job Zone and New York Stat e customers creating Job Zone accounts would be \nregistered in OSOS. The data common to both syst ems would move between them. When customers \ncomplete certain activities in Job Zone those activi ties would be automatically recorded in OSOS. \n \nThis project is needed to address the growing number of customers seeking services from the One-Stop \nsystem at a time when resources ava ilable to provide those services are shrinking. The services currently \navailable through Job Zone are not coordinated with se rvices that are available or provided through the \nOne-Stop System resulting in duplicate effort bot h on the part of the customer and One-Stop staffs. \n \nCurrent Status Report : 08/20/10 NaviSite sent scoping questions. Staff met with DEWS to develop \nresponses. \n \n \nLicensing (formerly DOSH Occupational Certificates) \n \nRecent legislation signed by Governor Paterson ma ndates that the NYS Department of Labor (DOL), \nDivision of Safety and Health (DOSH) begin certifying pyrotechnicians, effective October, 2009. DOSH \nwould like to use this opportunity to not only create a system to meet their immediate needs of issuing \npyrotechnician certificates, but to replace their current paper, mainfr ame, and Access database systems \nused for processing similar types of occupational certificates (cra ne operators, blasters, and laser \noperators) as well. The system will allow license candidates to submit certificate applications and \nsupplemental documentation, pay application fees, and ch eck the status of their applications, all on-line. \nAn internal component would allow DOSH staff to complete these same tasks plus additional case \nmanagement tasks of viewing, processing, and appr oving applications, scheduling competency exams, \ngenerating correspondence, running reports, recording inspection data, and recording the outcome of \nappeals. Finally, the system will produce a data file to be sent to the Department of Motor Vehicles \n(DMV) to support the printing and mailing of photo cert ificate identification cards. The scope of this \nproject was increased to include all licenses, certific ates and permits issued by the NYS DOL and provide \na full eCommerce solution designed to be easily utilized by other licensing entities. \n Short Term Solution: End users are entering applicat ion data in the system via the MS Access DB. \nProduction files are being sent to the NYS DMV to generate the IDs. \n Long Term Solution: Focus is being revised to account for all licensing applications within the agency. \nThe services and documentation created will be made available to other agencies for potential \nconsumption. \nCurrent Status Report : 8/20/2010 \n Project Status: The team is focusing on consum able user interfaces for the numerous licenses, \ncertifications and permits that are issued by DOL. We are also working toward optimizing the business \nprocesses to accommodate the various requirements each of these have. It is intended that the \nframework and documentat ion created will have the potential to be consumed by other agencies. \n \nWeekly Customer Meeting: Met with customer repr esentatives on 8/19/2010 to update them on the status \nof the project and progress made since the previous weekly meeting. \n Sprint Accomplishments this Week:  Daily scrum sessions. \n Continued analyzing the fram ework for the larger licenses within NYS DOL. \n Functional team continued to meet with users to review /revise business process models and \nspent time observing the business process for specific license types. \n Functional team continued to work on staff process model. \n Functional team continued the identification of business process optimization points. \n Development team continued adding functionality to components of the user interface. \n Development team focused on changes from business analyst and customer review of screens. \n Developers continued work on screen look and feel. \n Development team looked into a validation approach, met with other development team and \nEPAS to discuss a specific approach. \n Team worked on backlog items. \n Continued meetings to determine areas for business process optimization. \n Remaining sprints for the Pyrotechnics project will include: \n Sprint 7 - Continue work on GUI, Continue Bu siness Process Optimization effort, Service \nCandidate identification. \n Sprint 8 - TBD \n Sprint 9 - TBD \n Sprint 10 - TBD \n \n \nNotification Service in WAS \n \nThe Notification Service would be a generic utilit y service deployed within our WAS (Websphere \nApplication Server) environment t hat would be consumable by all other services, and Websphere Process \nServer and Message Broker . This service will allow for a cons umer to pass an XML message to the \nNotification Service to request an email notific ation be sent out to an individual or a group. \n \nCurrent Status Report: Effective on or before 10/9/09, t he WAS (WebSphere Application Server) \nNotification service was deployed and is now fu nctional in the development environment. Now all \nconsumers of the existing Message Broker service need to test their processes to assure the new \nnotification service is functioning as expected. This will be a good demonstration of service transparency \nin our SOA environment. The WSDL in WSRR was updated to reflect the new service's endpoint and Consumers will make no changes to their code. \n \nNo test consumer has been identified. \n \nNYC DYCD OSOS Data Conversion \n \nNew York City (NYC) Division of Youth & Communi ty Development (DYCD) has been working with NYC \nSmall Business Services (SBS) to develop the business requi rements and process to convert legacy data \nfrom their proprietary system into the One Stop Oper ating System (OSOS). They must develop a process \nto upload real time data on a regular basis (daily or weekly). They have provided a timeline and cross-\nwalk files (available upon request). Recent info rmation from the United States Department of Labor \n(USDOL) indicates that reporting requirements fo r Workforce Investment Streamlined Performance \nReporting (WISPR) will be implemented on 7/1/09, which means New York State will be out of \ncompliance if the NYC youth data is not in OSOS. The NYC youth data constitute s the majority of youth \ndata for the state. Also, the federal software for the WISPR will not provide for the inclusion of a \nWorkforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data (WIASRD) file from NYC, which is presently used \nfor reporting. \n \nCurrent Status Report: This project has been on hold since 7/10/09. \n \nOffice 2007 Upgrade \n \nThis project is to upgrade the Microsoft Office product from the 2003 suite to the 2007 suite for the \nDepartment of Labor. This upgrade will enable all divisi ons to take advantage of additional functionalities \nand fixes. This will also simplify the task of supporting this application internally. This version will also be \nmore stable than previous versions. \nCurrent Status Report: 07/19/10 Holding off on the push for at least three weeks. Working on the \norganization of OU's. Developing three different pushes of software packages to users depending on \naccess of ABS, Letter Generator and/or fax viewer. \nOMH/DOL One Stop Operating System (OSOS) Partnership \nThe NYS Office of Mental Health (OMH) has been aw arded a Medicaid Infrastructure Grant (MIG) that \nfocuses on assisting people with disabilities of obtai n and maintain competitive jobs. The funding is made \navailable to them by the federal Centers for Medica re and Medicaid Services and will be administered in \npartnership with 13 state agencies (the Office of Mental Health; the Office of Mental Retardation and \nDevelopmental Disabilities; Department of Health; State Office for the Aging; \n Education Department; Office of Alcoholism and Su bstance Abuse Services; Division of Housing and \nCommunity Renewal; Department of Transportation; O ffice of Children and Family Services; Office of \nTemporary and Disability Assistance; Division of Vete rans Affairs; NYS Department of Labor (NYSDOL); \nand the Commission on Quality of Care and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities). A partnership called \nthe Most Integrated Settings Coordinating Council (M ISCC), containing staff from the above agencies is \nresponsible for implementing the grant and establis hing a partnership that will assist people with \ndisabilities to find employment. \n \nThe MISCC determined that they needed a common case management system that could be used by all \npartners to track employment relat ed services provided to this popul ation. OMH had experience through a \nDOL contract with OSOS. OMH a pproached the department to disc uss the possibility of OSOS being \nused for this initiative. \n \nIn discussions with OMH, we have tentatively planned to develop this partnership during 2010 and \nimplement in 2011. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 Hardware sizing details are being worked out. The project scope \ndocument was created and given to OMH for sign off. OMH provided its comments. DOL Counsel office \nraised some significant issues with respect to UI C onfidentiality. The issues are being worked out at DOL \nsenior management. Team is set to meet next week to discuss the requirements further. \n \n \nOSOS Consortium Upgrades \n This project will provide application enhancements requested by the One Stop O perating System (OSOS) \nConsortium states which include: \n Additional edits and reporting changes to accommodate Stimulus Funds \n Ability to change job bank job orders to ‘suspend’ status in mediated \n Changes to how Inactivated Staff Administrator and office accounts are handled \n Adding employer origination method \n The New York OSOS production application will be upgraded to v5.2 which will include these change \ncontrol requests and several corrected application errors. \n Current Status Report: 8/20/10 The Consortium states continue to work on completing user acceptance \ntesting for v5.1. Version 5.2 was released to the demo site and made available for states to take into \ntheir test sites. The developers began work on deliver ing Federal Guidance Clarification for ARRA report \nchanges and a low effort change to Display of SSN in Self Service Site, in a v5.2.01 patch. Business \nrequirements for the ARRA report changes were co mpleted and sent for approval. Developers have \nbegun working on business requirements for v5.3 . Scope Committee resolved issue for OSOS-152: \nTelephone Extension fields. Staff held the weekly Scope call with all participating states and the weekly \nstatus meeting with t he contracted developers. \n \n \nPBX Replacement - NYC \n \nThe PBX equipment at 4 locations in New York City is currently functioning, but needs to be replaced. \nThe equipment is more than 10 years old and is no longer manufactured. Spare parts and \nknowledgeable technicians will be increasingly difficult to find. Locations involved are 138-60 Barclay \nStreet, Flushing; 75 Varick Street, NYC; 9 Bond Street, NYC; and 149th Street, NYC \n \nWe plan to develop specifications for a system that would be appropriate for all 4 locations. If the same \nequipment is in place at all locations, administration will be more efficient, training easier, interconnection \npossible (if that becomes a requirement) and spare parts can be shared. However, we will start with the \ninstallation of only one system where it is needed most, in Flushing Queens. Once that installation has been completed, we will evaluate the equipment an d vendor prior to moving forward with another \ninstallation. \n Specifications will be developed bas ed on current user needs as well as potential future needs such as \ncall center, IP and telecommuting capabilities. \n Current Status Report: 8/20/2010 The disapproved request for funding is being discussed at the \nexecutive level. We are evaluating other sites fo r possible system replacement. A request for 400 Oak \nStreet is still pending, but has not progressed in several weeks. \n \n \nPeopleSoft Travel Software Implementation \n This project will allow the NYS Department of Labor (DOL) to implement/pilot Oracle/Peoplesoft Travel \nsoftware purchased by the New York Financial Man agement System (NYFMS) for an on-line paperless \ntravel system. Currently, DOL employ ees who travel must submit a paper travel voucher to receive travel \nreimbursement. This travel so ftware will eventually be rolled out to all state agencies. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 Team members from Finance and Planning & Technology have \nreviewed a high level design and will review the docu ment for a final sign off. We had no meeting this \nweek due to vacation schedules. \n \n \nPrimavera Upgrade to v7.0 \n \nThe Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio M anagement application needs to be upgraded to v7.0 \nfrom v6.0 to allow users and administrators to ta ke advantage of the enhancem ents and fixes that have \nbeen included. \n Current Status Report: 08/20/10 A Primavera technician contacted our technical services department \nbut the Progress Reporter application has not been in stalled successfully on the development server. \n \n \nSafety and Loss Prevention Incentive Program \n Chapter 6, Section 33 of the Labor Laws of 2007, titled the 2007 New York Workers' Compensation Law \nReform, amended Article 7, Section 134(6-10) of the Workers' Compensation Law has charged the \nCommissioner of Labor with developing a workplace sa fety and loss prevention incentive program which \nencourages eligible employers to voluntarily implem ent a Safety Incentive Program, a Drug and Alcohol \nPrevention Program, and/or a Return to Work Progr am in exchange for a reduction in workers' \ncompensation insurance premiums, or a reduction in security deposits in the case of self-insured \nemployers. The Commissioner was given the re sponsibility for monitoring all incentive plans \nimplemented by the employer and for establishing rules for the certification of safety and loss \nmanagement specialists who perform such services. \n This project will assist the Division of Safety and He alth in successfully implementing this program by \nproviding a means by which employers can view prog ram information and instructions, access samples of \nmodel incentive programs, and apply for one or more of the three incentive programs. It will also enable \nindividuals to apply for specialist certificates in any of the three incentive areas so that they may assist \nemployers with the development of their safety and loss prevention program. Internal DOL staff will be \nable to review and approve applications and monito r the on-going implementation of employers' \nprograms. \n Current Status Report: 08/20/10 Project team completed three services: RetrieveInsuranceCarrierList \nRetrieveAllWorkerCompensations and RetrieveWorker CompensationDetails. This last service was \nintegrated with the GUI. The employer service wa s further modified so we can add the Workers' \nCompensation carrier's address. Some of the static pages needed for the customer demo were \ncompleted. The BA continued working on test cases. T he customer was not available to attend the status \nmeeting. \n \n \nService Center Procedures \n This project includes the installation of the inter nal and external Knowledge Base modules of the Service \nCenter Application, which utilizes Numara FootPrints version 8.1. It also includes the development of \nadditional reports created within the FootPrints struct ure. If FootPrints is un able to provide the required \nreports, other tools will be considered such as Crysta l Reports or Cognos software. In addition, desk-to-\ndesk procedures with the Office for Technology's Help Desk will be documented. New York State \nDepartment of Labor already owns the product and has an adequate number of licenses to complete \nthese enhancements. \nCurrent Status Report: 8/13/10 The original project basically had been completed, but we are retooling \nthe Service Center Application (A -Info). The entire project is be ing reviewed for changes to meet \nmanagements latest concerns in additional to changes that we see would be beneficial to our \norganization. Much of the primary Service Center Ap plication is completed; we are currently working on \nthe escalation processes and blending in the change management application into the main project. \n \nImpediment: We are having difficulties finding time to work on our projects and still run the day to day \nbusiness including incident management. \n \nSoftware Tracking \n Establish a process to track the location and use of all purchased DOL software licenses. This is needed \nto ensure we know where our licensed software is locat ed, who it is assigned to, and that it is actually \nbeing used. In addition this will provide a means to accu rately account for all the software and to verify it \nis used in compliance with the terms of each license. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 The regularly scheduled import of all System Center Configuration \nManagement (SCCM) files occurred. One additional As set Manager client was deployed on a Unix server \nlast week, and two clients were deployed on laptop co mputers. There were no new clients installed on Windows servers. Followed up with the Office For Te chnology (OFT) on deploying Asset Manager clients \non hosted servers and alternat ives to deploying it to desktop comput ers. OFT is still investigating. \nInstalled the new Inventory Manager software on a serv er. Working with the vendor to resolve access \nissues. \n \n \nState Financial System OSC Bulkload Certification \n This project is to modify the NYSDOL’s accounting sy stem (FARS) so that DOL can continue to interface \nwith the Office of the State Controller (OSC ) using OSC’s new State Financial System. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 The project team performed the following tasks this reporting period: \n Conducted weekly meeting to report progress of project. \n Held daily scrums. \n Turned over testing of NY71 vendor screen pr ogramming UPDATE and ADD testing to users. \n Install of mainframe Uncombine changes completed. \n WIA Uncombine testing to start next week. \n Continued work on IN43 screen changes. \n Continued work on PC22 screen changes. \n Reviewed the CA5MEALS job. \n Created a 2nd version of the Changes to FARS do cument that eliminates items that were crossed \nout and to update dates. \n M161 reports sent to users for review. Corrections made based on feedback \n Continued to investigate problems with data not transmitting properly. \n Attended SFS Bulkload Q&A session. \n \n \nTelephone Call Center Collaboration Assessment \nThe purpose of this project is to investigate opportuni ties for call center collaboration with other New York \nState governmental entities and to implement call cent er collaboration beginning with the New York State \nInsurance Fund. The New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) has an established and mature call \ncenter operation with resources that could possibly be shared at an overall savings to the State. The \nNYSDOL telephony infrastructure currently suppor ts over 300 call center agents in three agency \nlocations; Albany, NY, Glendale, NY, and Troy, NY. NYSDOL’s potentially sharable assets include: \n \n Call Center Infrastructure – Telephony hardware and software, i.e., trunks, servers, switches, \nComputer Telephony Integration (C TI), Interactive Voice Response, (IVR), outbound dialing, etc., \nas well as applications to be installed by t he end of State Fiscal Year 2009-2010 which will \nmanage call prioritization, on-hold scheduled call back, and web chat. \n Call Center Agent Human Resources – trained staff are available to accept and direct calls, and \nperform real-time inquires and updates on behalf of callers. \n \nAny or all of the above assets have the potential to be shared. NYSDOL might collaborate with another \ngovernmental entity by sharing Call Center Agents. Voice ports, CTI, IVR, outbound dialing, on-hold \nscheduled call back or web chat might be sh ared individually or in any combination. \n Current Status Report: 8/20/2010 The Customer weekly meeting was postponed due to vacation. The \npolicy and procedure document draft is complete. The document is being vetted. Comments are being \nreviewed and the document adjusted. \n \nTrade Act MIS \n The NYS Department of Labor (DOL) has applied for a grant for improvements to technology related to \ndata collection for the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program. Eighty percent of this grant money \nwill be set aside to implement a new TAA Case Managem ent System. Work is in the early stages of \nanalysis and documentation of the current work proc ess and data flow. The Workforce Development & \nTraining division intends to continue their current acti vities through to the development and release of a \nnew system. Once the system is released, the need for their services will be drastically reduced. \n The planned TAA Management System will replace and in tegrate multiple stand- alone data systems used \nto administer and report on the TAA program \n Current Status Report: 8/20/10 Project Status: The new petition, petition notes, claimant, application, \ndocument creation, claimant determination, and part s of the waiver modules have been deployed to the \ntest site. The TAA project completed development fo r Waiver, except for incorporating changes for the \ncommon human task service. The LDAP entitle ments have been created by the NYS Office for \nTechnology (OFT), the project team is working on in tegrating the Identity Management Service into the \ncode for the Petition Module. The team continued to work with the xPression group to finalize document \ntemplates. The team continues to plan for PeopleSo ft integration for the financial sections; the project \nbegan developing funding screens and designing fund request process in relation to the Job Search/Relocation Allowance and Training modules. T he project team held the weekly status meeting \nwith the customer. \n Project Impediment: The project team is awaiting de ployment of a generic human task service to the \ndevelopment environment. The team cannot complete the waiver module or the fund request modules \nuntil the human task service is completed. \nSprint Name: Correct Application Issues Start Da te: 8/1/10 Planned End Date: 9/17/10 Status: On \nSchedule \nSprint Status: Project team began work on the next se t of outstanding application issues for correction. \n Sprint Accomplishments: The project team worked on fixes for employer. \n \nSprint Impediments: None \n \nSprint Name: PeopleSoft Integration with Screens Start Date: 7/26/10 Planned End Date: 9/10/10 \nStatus: On Schedule \n \nSprint Status: Project is working to integr ate the PeopleSoft services with application. \n \nSprint Accomplishments: The project team contin ues to work on the Claimant Fiscal Summary page. \n Sprint Impediments: none \n \nSprint Name: Integrate Identity Management for Peti tion Module Start Date: 7/12/10 Planned End Date: \n8/30/10 Status: On Schedule \n \nSprint Status: Project team began work on in tegrating the service for user security. \n \nSprint Accomplishments: The projec t team successfully integrated the framework for the petition module. \n Sprint Impediments: Issues discovered while integr ating need to be resolved by EPAS before work can \ncomplete. \n \nSprint Name: Fund Request Development Design St art Date: 8/1/10 Planned End Date: 9/17/10 \nStatus: On Schedule Sprint Status: Project team began work on tec hnical design for the training fund request. \n \nSprint Accomplishments: The database tables were created in the test environment. The service model \nwas created and process m odels have been started. \n \nSprint Impediments: None \n \n \nTransfer of NYS Job Bank from AJE to JobCentral NLX \nReplace the current NYS Job Exchange hosted by AJE to a new site to be hosted by JobCentral National \nLabor Exchange (NLX). We have had escalating problems with AJE due to ongoing changes being made \nto make the site self-supporting and/or profitable. Thes e changes include the charging of fees for service \nto both job seekers and employers, advertising, move of the customer support services to India, and \nexpanding partnerships with other fee-charging job sites allowing more listings that are suspect. There is \nlittle to no notice of significant changes being made to the site and insufficient firewall protections \nbetween the NYS hosted site and the national public site. In addition, AJE has taken the position that they \n'own' the employer job order data from employer regist ered with the NYS site. This is in conflict with the \nstate's understanding when the hosting arrangement was made. Note that New Jersey has already \nsevered their relation with AJE for this reason an d we understand that Kentucky is moving in that \ndirection as well. At the same time we have seen major improvements to the JobCentral NLX site. Since \ninception the JobCentral site has grown significant ly and now has the participation of as many more \nstates than AJB had prior to termination (while AJE has comparatively few states participating at this \npoint). Through the JobCentral as sociation with NASWA, the needs of the public labor exchange and the \nState's participation on the JobCentral operatio ns committee have direct input into changes and \nenhancements made to the site. JobCentral limits the sour ces of jobs coming into the NLX, thus providing \nthe states with more protection against the types of problems seen with AJE. In addition, JobCentral staff \nis much more responsive to requests from states and offer many other advantages thru their association \nwith NASWA and their employer membership. This change has been approved by executive level staff. \nIn addition, Counsel's office has agreed that this chan ge is within the terms of the current contracts that \nNYSDOL has with both Navisite/AJE and \nDEA/JobCentral NLX, so no additional procurement process steps are needed. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 The weekly customer status meeting was held on Wednesday at 12:30 \npm. Data Exchange Out from OSOS was changed to JC on 7/29 and are conducting post-project clean-up. JobCentral assigned their own origination method codes to jobs that send to OSOS. Since all of the \nJobCentral jobs in OSOS changed, it took more than a day to load the file. \n \n \nUI Additional Claims on Web \nThe purpose of this project is to add functionality to the UI Benefits Web application for additional claims. \n \nCurrent Status Report : 08/13/10 The development team, analysts and functional managers have \nagreed upon the high level requirements and approach for the project. The technical lead is working on a \nshell prototype. \n UI Address Normalization Project \n \nThe purpose of this proposal is to initiate a projec t to add functionality to the UI Benefits Web application \nfor address normalization. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 Address Normalization serv ice design was discussed with the \nappropriate architecture resources. It was decided to forgo building in an extra level of abstraction for the \nservice and stick with the architect ed solution from the Proof of Concept. \nThe address files that support the Address Normalizati on service are only valid for a short period of time. \nIn trying to resurrect the Proof of Concept, it was discovered that these addres s files have both expired \nand need to updated. Since the department has not yet purchased these address files, we need to \ncontinue to receive 'evaluation' copies from the vendor. Until such time as the purchase is completed, \nthis will be a continuing problem. Database is aware of this issue and is working towards a resolution. \n \n \nUI Appeal Board Replacement \nThe purpose of this project is to create a UI Appeals Board system and proc esses which will improve \nNYSDOL's ability to provide quality and flexible services to Claimants and Employers. The new system \nwill replace the current Cúram-based system with a m odernized, service oriented application. It will also \nprovide desired improvem ents and enhancements. The completed app lication will provide DOL staff the \nability to work more effectively and efficiently by aut omating business activity to reduce redundancy and \nerrors, create electronic files and forms and automate the implementation of hearing decisions to reduce \ncycle time. It will also create an Appeals Board system t hat will provides a self-s ervice portal for various \ncustomer needs, such as: protest monetary and non- monetary determinations; provide customers with \nstatus updates; provide the functionality to withdraw a hearing or an appeal, as well as functionality for \neffected parties to read hearing and appeal decisions and request an appeal of those decisions. This \nproject will also provide a mechanism for an employer to proceed to an Informal Conference for a hearing \nrequest based on an audit det ermination. This project will also pr ovide NYSDOL users with electronic \nhearing files, eliminating the manual routing of paper hearing cases. \n Current Status Report 8/20/10 \n \nProject Status: The Project Team is working thr ough the tasks of Sprint One, which includes the \ndevelopment of the screens for the Claimant portion of the New York Use Case: Complete a Hearing \nRequest and the preparation of the Use Case Specification Documents for the Employer portion of the \nUse Case. The Project Manager and the Business Analys ts are working with Customer Representatives \nfrom the Appeal Board, Unemployment Insurance an d the Adjudication Services Office to finalize the \nadditions and adjustments needed to satisfy New York’s requirements. The Executive Secretary for the \nAppeal Board, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, the Project Manager, the Staff Supervisor and the \nBusiness Analysts completed the review of the Cl aimant screens to Complete a Hearing Request. The \nChief Administrative Law Judge agreed to provide th e team with additional information concerning the \nmandated languages for Web Page translations, l egal documents and Appeal Board communications. \nThe Executive Secretary plans to schedule a m eeting with Appeal Board personnel and members of \nPlanning and Technology to discuss plans to coordinate the efforts of the Appeal Board, the Re-Write \nProject Team and the Legacy Maintenance Team to provide assistance to improve efficiency for case \nprocessing. The Weekly Customer meeting was held as scheduled. Sprint Name: Sprint One: Appeal \nBoard ReWrite Development - NYUseCase1027 Comp lete a Hearing Request (Claimant) Preparation. \nSprint Timeline (6 weeks). Starts: 7/28/2010 Plann ed End Date: 9/8/2010 Timeline Status: On Schedule \n(Ahead of Schedule, On Schedule, Behind Schedule, Blocked, On-Hold) \n Sprint Status: The Project Team resolved an issue related to the implementation of the GUI validation \nframework, collaborated with the User Representati ves to finalize the Use Case requirements for the \nClaimant and conducted an initial review of the em ployer screens. Daily scrums are being held. \n \nSprint Accomplishments this week: The Developers worked with the Enterprise Architect who developed \nthe GUI Framework Validation to resolve an issue with the implementation in the Appeal Board project. The Developers began to incorporate Exception Ha ndling standards into the implementation of the \nscreens. The Project Manager and the Developers participated in Scrum Master training with the \nConsultant who has been performing that function for several of the Modernization Developer Teams. \nThe Business Analyst incorporated the feedback from the Unemployment Insurance and the Adjudication \nServices Office User representatives concerning the initial review of the Employer screens for Completing a Hearing request. The Team participated in daily scrums and team meetings for further guidance and \ncoordination. \n \n Project Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None at this time \n \nUI Audit and Investigation Case Management System \n The purpose of this project is to re-design the Case Management System (CMS) currently used by UI Tax \nEnforcement Staff. The project in cludes automating the se lection of audits and investigations, manual \nrequests for investigations, routing the assignmen ts to the correct enforcement staff, transferring \nassignments between offices an d staff, facilitate the scheduling of field staff appointments, allowing \nenforcement supervisors to manage assignments, and providing workfl ow for supervisory and Quality \nAssurance review of comple ted assignments. \n The Case Management System is a mainframe base d system that contains cases that have been \nautomatically selected for follow-up work enforcement work. There are a number of reasons why a case \nmight be selected. Examples are for Failure to File (FTF) a wage report, or for a delinquent wage report. \nNot all cases are selected automatically. Some ar e manually generated, such as Miscellaneous cases \nand Liability cases, and must be keyed in by the Central Assignment and Collection unit (CACS) staff. \nThe follow up work in the Case Management System mi ght be work performed in the Central Assignment \nand Collection unit, (a UI Tax Enforcement unit) or an assignment to be handled in the field by UI Tax \nServices. The Case Management System was not co mpleted when it was originally built. It does not \ninclude Benefit Claims Investigations and Collection A ssignments. Bank Levies are also not in the Case \nManagement System. Bank Levies are handled exter nal to CMS in a Microsoft Access Bank Levy \napplication. The Bank Levy System records pertinent information about employers bank accounts, \nwarrants placed against employers, and levies sent to banks to collect against employers’ accounts, and \nthe status of those levies. \n \nThis project will also develop a portable computer syst em to facilitate field work done by UI Tax Auditors \nand Tax Compliance Agents, and replace the current Tax Services Database Management System \n(TSDBMS). This includes data gathering via keyboard input and file import, calculations of amounts due, \nestimation of amounts due, collection of amounts due, penalty and interest calculations, report \ngeneration, data upload and download with primary UI syst em, forms generation, daily activities reporting, \nelectronic signature capture, and calendar synchronization. \nThe current Tax Services Database Management Syst em was developed using Microsoft Access. It is \ndeployed on laptops that UI Tax Auditors and Tax Compliance Agents bring into the field to record the results of their assignments. The UI Tax Audito rs and Tax Compliance Agent s receive their assignments \nas paper printouts sent from the Central Assignm ent and Collection Services unit (CACS). The data \nenter the assignment information into TSDBMS. Manual input of employer information wastes Field Staff \nand employer time, and is subject to keying errors. \n \nThe results of each field assignment are printed. Investigation assignments ar e mailed to the District \nSupervisor, who reviews each assignment. Afterw ard, the District Super visor sends the reviewed \nassignment paperwork to the central office for Qualit y Assurance unit review. Audit assignments are sent \ndirectly to the CACS. The need to print and mail co mpleted assignment paperwork wastes paper, time, \nand postage. Some information is uploaded from the field staffs’ TSDBMS to a server, where it is \ndownloaded into to the Microsoft Access based system called the Assignment Register. The Assignment \nRegister maintains a history of field assignments and is used for Federal and NYS reporting. \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/10 (Agile Development Project) \n \nProject Status: Phase two includes enhancements to the query system (ledger details, address [physical \nand mailing] synchronization, incorp orating addresses in searches), required changes identified during \nthe pilot of release one and development of the assignm ent workflow system. Sprints four through eight are now complete. Sprint four accomplishments incl ude: system requirements s pecification (SRS), user \ninterface specification and business rules, technica l artifacts (system context model, component model, \narchitectural overview diagram, GUI prototype, service model, architectural decision document) and \nservice specifications. The business calendar and ID generator utility components were completed. A \nproof of concept (POC) was done for forms digitization (five forms). Sprint five was an abbreviated three \nweek effort that concentrated on modifications and enhancements to release one (name search \nrefinements, address search, quarterly reporting history from ledger, flags on employer profile) while we \nworked with EPAS to finalize some design decisions need ed to move forward with the project. Sprint six \nincluded a new search using NAICS code, incorporating some additional business rules for the quarterly \nreporting history from ledger screen and preparation of test scenarios and test scripts for UAT. Sprint \nseven included A&I v1.1 implementation and the star t of core functional foundation development based \non the PA assets. Sprint eight focused on redesi gning the core components for Case Management \n(liable employer, claim and audit case) and Interested Party Management (employer, worker and TPA) to \nservice enable them. A weekly meeting is held wi th the customer to discuss the project status. \n The team is working on building core foundation pieces (core case management, core workflow, core \ninterested party management, etc.) for the modernized system using the PA assets. Development of the \nassignment workflow system will follow and will build on these. \nSprint Name: Sprint Nine: Core Functional Foundation Development - Case Management and Interested \nParty Management Service Delivery. Sprint Time line (6 weeks). Starts: 7/19/2010 Planned End Date: \n8/27/2010 Timeline Status: On Schedule (Ahead of Sc hedule, On Schedule, Behind Schedule, Blocked, \nOn-Hold) \n Sprint Status: The team's efforts have shifted to build core functional foundation pieces (core case \nmanagement, core workflow, core interested party management, etc.) for the modernized system using \nthe PA assets. These will be used by the A&I system and others. The goal for this sprint is to deliver \nCase Management (CMS) and Interested Party Management (IPM) uses cases with respect to employer \nregistration, claimant registration and profile management. Development continued with Release 2 \nversions of IPM Create Employer, Get Employer, Update Employer, Search Employer, Create Worker, \nGet Worker, Update Worker, Search Worker, Cr eate TPA, Get TPA, Update TPA and Search TPA, \nCreate Predecessor/Successor Association, Create Owner Officer, Search Owner Officer and Get Owner \nOfficer now completed. Development is also comp lete for Release 2 CMS search cases (by Case ID, \nWorker IP ID, Worker Last Name and SSN, Claimant IP ID, Audit Case and Liable Employer Case). Code \nreview, refactoring, integration with the new UCMS DBA3 schema and unit testing are in progress. The \nteam is creating NY versions of the PA use cases for CMS and IPM. The team is also finishing up \nworking with the database group to maintain additions and changes to the physical and mailing \naddresses in the enterprise database. Additionally the core team has created a service specification for \nthe Address Verification service and is working with the UI Address Normalizati on project to create the \nservice(s) required. Daily scrums are being held. \n Sprint Accomplishments this week: Monitoring of the latest A&I release (v1.1) and work on maintaining \ndaily additions and changes to the addresses in the enterprise database. With the latest hardware \nupdate, the A&I application has been successfully prom oted to the first level of the new environment and \nis now being upgraded to WAS 7.0. The A&I Us er Manual (v2.1) update has been finalized and \ndistributed to field staff. Work on utilizing the core functional foundation pieces for the PA assets \ncontinued for Case Management and Interested Party Management. Use cases were completed for Create Employer Record, Create TPA Record, Create Worker Record, Create Association, Update \nAssociation and Create Pr edecessor/Successor Association. Completed development and testing of \nCreate Owner Officer, Get Owner Officer and Search Owner Officer. \nProject Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None at this time \n \n \nUI Benefit Adjudication \n This project will redesign processes related to the ad judication of non-monetary issues. At the present \ntime, claim issues are identified automatically bas ed upon information supplied when the claimant files \nthe claim through the Internet or the phone, once the cl aimant has completed the claim, the information is \nsubmitted to one of the Mainframe applications ca lled Unemployment Benefits Wage Reporting system \n(UBWR). Every morning the Telephone Claims Center s (TCCs) download claims with issues from the \nUBWR system into a Microsoft Access system whic h is referred to as Case Management. Once the \nUBWR data is in Case Management, the adjudication units sort and query the information based on their \nassignment needs. For example, the Adjudication Unit s will sort the Case Management data by the last 4 \ndigits of the Social Security Number and assign them to adjudicators within specific ranges (e.g., from \n0000 to 1054). Adjudications Units will also sort t he Case Management data into Spanish claims (Local \nOffice 809, 839, 889), or all the claims with a given effective date. \n \nAssignments are given to adjudicators via the Ca ses Management System. The adjudicators accept \ncases, and annotate results in the Microsoft Access Case Management System. To adjudicate claims \nissues, adjudicators frequently contact claimants and employers to gather information needed to make \neligibility determinations. They may call either part y, or send forms or questionnaires to obtain \ninformation. When adjudicators take statements via telephone, they transcribe the statement into forms \nthat exist in the Letter Generator System. Thos e forms are automatically imaged and saved with the \nclaimant’s imaged file. When adjudicators request wr itten information, they later look for written \nresponses from claimants by manually searching the File Access Facility (FAF), to see if correspondence \nor questionnaires were returned and imaged. Adjudicators view UBWR mainframe inquiry screens, and run COGNOS reports to research information that was reported when claimants filed their Original Claim. \nThis is done to compare it to statements made to the adjudicators. In instances where there are \ndiscrepancies, the adjudicators send the COGNOS re ports to be imaged by UI Division Central Support \nto be added to the claimants image file. \n \nThe current automated method of supporting claims adjudication is inefficient. Much time is lost in adjudicating claims, and information is not fully captur ed or used to automatically drive the process. \nInformation is stored in disparate nonintegrated sy stems, and is frequently captured only in image form, \nrather than as data. Information needed by adjudi cators is spread across the FAF system, UBWR \nsystem, Case Management System, and Voice/W eb system (accessed via COGNOS). Many \napplications in use are no longer supported. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 (Agile Development Project) \n Project Status: The adjudication team held a conference call with the state of New Jersey to discuss their \nupcoming implementation of the f ederal Separation Information Database System (SIDES). We also \ncontinued analysis of adjudication systems require ments, assessed and validated Pennsylvania non-\nmonetary use cases, worked on creation of Pennsylvani a-style 'smart forms', collaborated with the user \ninterface development team and continued discussion with the multi-state consortium. We are \nconsolidating the lessons learned from the SIDES c onference and the discussions with New Jersey and \nwith the third party agent company. Goals, activities and deliverables for the next sprint are being \nplanned. Business customers were updated with project status and progress. \n Sprint Name: between sprints. Sprint Timeline ( ) Start Date: Planned End Date: Timeline Status: (Ahead \nof Schedule, On Schedule, Behind Schedule, Blocked, On-Hold) \n Between-Sprint Status: Technical staff continued system and data analysis. Business analysts continued \nuse case review, fit gap analysis and issue resolution. \n Sprint Accomplishments this Week: \n Continued PA asset use case and interface review and analysis. \n Analyzed adjudication systems and data flow. \n Held discussions with New Jersey to learn about their impending SIDES implementation. \n \nProject Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None. \n \nUI Benefit Ledger Replacement \nThis project will replace the current Claimant Benefit Ledger with a newer, and easier to use ledger. The \ncurrent ledger was written several decades ago and is no longer able to efficiently handle today’s UI \nBenefits business. Pr ogramming maintenance is ri sky because code has been pi eced together over many \nyears. Also, a great deal of informat ion currently stored on the ledger is not financial information. This \nproject will separate information currently stored on th e claimant ledger into the financial transaction \ninformation and the employer charging information. Beca use this data is interrelated, a relationship must \nbe created to provide the ability to view employer charges associated with a payment and view payments \nassociated with an employer’s charges. \n \nCurrently, few adjustments to the ledger are automated. Most require UI staff to calculate the adjustment \namounts and enter the transactions into a batch update process. There are limited edits on the entries; therefore, transactions are frequent ly rejected during the batch run because the transactions do not \nbalance. Adjustment transactions will be calculated and posted to the ledger automatically in as many \ncases as possible. UI staff will be able to post transa ctions on-line that cannot be posted automatically. \n \nOther processes that use the ledger information may require interface capabilities, such as the \noverpayment system, jump keys that access the led ger, and the master file build. In addition, OTDA also \naccesses this information. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 Agile Development \n \nSchedule: POC Sprint: June 21, 2010 until Sept 30, 2010: In Progress \n Status Summary: The team identified the Post Rece ivables to Ledger and the Pay Benefits Use Cases to \nbe modeled and presented to UID customer. The proj ect EPAS resource has exec uted code for the Post \nReceivable to Ledger. Additional questions were generated and documented for the PA Architect. A spreadsheet was started that will document what methods are calling other components. The team is \nclose to understanding the ledger update proces s. The customer status meeting was held. \n \nAccomplishments: Two transaction types for presentation to the custom er were identified. Modeling of \nthe Employer and Benefit s Use Cases and transactions continued. \n \n \nUI Benefits Certification \n This project is intended to re-design of all of the pr ocesses associated with weekly certification for regular \nUI benefits. It also includes the re-des ign of all of the processes associated with weekly certification for UI \nspecial programs including shared wo rk, TRA, DUA and SEP. This proj ect will leverage the existing voice \nweb platform to implement the enhancements designed by UISIM for the processe s associated with UI \nweekly certifications. It includes modifying the existing platform to allow self-servi ce web certifications for \nshared work claimants/empl oyers, TRA claimants, SEP claimants and DUA claimants currently accepted \nin paper form only. This project will add the necessa ry front end screens/rules/logic and backend logic to \nprocess certifications on-line for all of the special programs clai mants. The special programs certification \nfunctionality includes an on-line application for shared work employers to submit weekly certifications on \nbehalf of their shared work employees. The design allo ws the employer to complete one certification for \nall of the employees at once. Today, the shared work employer is required to complete the bottom portion \nthe paper certification separately for each employ ee. It also includes the enhancements to the \ncertification application to collect last employer information for additional claims. \n \nThis project will also upgrade the weekly certificatio n application on the voice web platform to allow for \nmissed certification weeks on the web. Currently, when a claimant forgets to certify for a given week and \nthen calls to certify the next week they need to speak wi th a TCC representative to submit the certification for the missed week. Once the ski p week functionality is implemen ted, the system will accept the \ncertification for the missed (skip) week without human intervention. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 (Agile Development Project) \n \nBacklog Item: File Continued Claim Internet (R3USE790) \n Sprint 8: File a Clean Certification: Timeline (TBD) Started: 8/12/2010, Planned End Date: 9/30/2010, \nTimeline Status: On Schedule (Ahead of Schedule, On Schedule, Behind Schedule, Blocked, On-Hold) \n Sprint 8 Overview: File a Clean Certification: Deliverables: Update Use Case R3USE790 to reflect \nprocesses for filing a single week clean certificat ion, documented screen validations, updated business \nrules in iLog, analysis to determine first alternate path to be developed in the next sprint, Technical \nSpecifications (Service Architecture, Domain Model , Data Model, Service Specification), prototypes \nmodified to reflect updated Use Case, data model mapped to business object model. \nSprint Status: Primavera scheduling for Sprint 8 wa s completed this week. The Business Analysts have \nstarted updating the Use Case documentation and docu menting the screen validations. Some progress \nwas impacted this week due a 3 day absence of the lead Business Analyst who was attending a \nconference. Service analysis and design continued this week for development of the Service Model. A \ncross reference of business objec ts to the data model was develop ed. This cross reference will be \nvalidated and updated according to a new PA code drop anticipated to be delivered in late August. The \ncustomer status meeting was held. \n Sprint Accomplishments this Week: \n Service design was started. \n Primavera activity scheduling for Sprint 8 was completed. \n Updates to R3USE790 Use Case were started. \n Project Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None \n \n \nUI Benefits Intake \n \nThe Unemployment Insurance Benefits Intake (UI Ben In take) project is one of many projects in the larger \nUnemployment Insurance System Impr ovement (UISIM) initiative. This project is intended to take an \nagile approach to the enhancement, or re-design, of the processes associated with intake for regular UI \nbenefits including the Remote Initial Claims (RIC) application. \n \nSome of the existing procedures fo r processing claims are paper driv en, manual processes. Other \nexisting systems were built with technology that is no longer supported. This poses a potential risk of not \nbeing able to fully recover from a system failure. The migration of targeted mainframe programs and \ndatabase structures is essential to continue to pr ovide claimants with the ability to submit an original \nclaim. \n \nThe first major deliverable of this project will be Shared Work. It will be conducted as a sub-project of the \noverall Benefit Intake project. It will produce 3 major deliverables: 1) Implement the Shared Work \nquestion on the Web Original Claim system to enable Shared Work Claimants to submit self service \nUnemployment Insurance claims 2) Enable upload of employers' Shared Work Plans 3) Enable the UI \nDivision to add and maintain the employers' Shared Work Plans. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 (Agile Development Project) \n \nProject Status for UI Benefits Intake: Work cont inues to get the Shared Work application and related \ncomponents working on the Staging servers. Perfor mance testing was conducted and the results are \nbeing reviewed. The Claimant Profile and Preference Management team has reviewed the GUI with the analysts and a business customer review is scheduled for next week. The Initial Claim-Employment \nHistory team has identified the initial claim databa se and is working to identify the accuracy and \ncompleteness of the schema. \n Sprint Name: Intake-SW2-9 -Develop next release of the Shared Work Application for Shared Work Unit \n \nSprint Timeline: Planned End Date: 6/4/2010, Timeline Status: Open \nSprint Status: The Shared Work Team is working with Technical Services, Release Management and \nEnterprise Architect Staff to properly configure se rvers for the Shared Work web application and related \ncomponents on the Staging servers. The Performanc e Testing Team is compiling the testing results and \nwill schedule discussion with the entire team. The Dat abase Team is assisting in troubleshooting an issue \nwith the SW scheduler that is needed to delete bo okmarked plans that have never been submitted. \n \nImpediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: \n The employer role user acceptance testi ng cannot be scheduled until the Common Authentication \nis available. \n The siteminder logout process has been found to be not working according to the required \nbehavior. The team architect is working with the OFT resource to change it to the required \nbehavior. This will impact other web applications. \n There is a 4 hour active session timeout limit. This is not acceptable to the user community. This \nis a policy decision under discussion by upper management. A decision is expected on this next week. \n \nSprint Name: Intake - Claimant Profile & Preference Management - Sprint 1 - Complete Claimant Profile \nand Preference Management. Sprint Timeline: (6 weeks) \nStart Date: 7/20/2010 Planned End Date: 8/30/2010, Timeline Status: Open \n Sprint Status: The Business Analysts met with the customers on Tuesday and provided them with a \ndemo of the Profile and Preferences GUI. The analysts are now in the process of creating a screenshot \nflow for a final review for the users. In addition, the PA use cases are being updated to reflect the NY business. EPAS has complet ed the review of the technical spec ification document and have made some \nsuggestions that are still pending within their group. They will next review the wsdl/xsds. The service \ndevelopers are coding and are working on integrating with the interested party service developed by the \ncore team. Some delays have been encountered for the profile team as a result of coding/environment \nissues with the core team. The solution architect is working on a collective effort with the other teams to \nstandardize the transformation of the wsdl/xsds. The GUI developers are continuing to work on \nvalidations and incorporating changes requested by the analysts. All code is still residing locally on \ndeveloper desktops. \nImpediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: \n The Clearcase stream is not yet available fo rcing both the 2 GUI developers and the 2 Service \ndevelopers to work directly from their desktops and manually sync up their code. Scrum Master \nhas reported the problem to management and the te am architect is requesting a date from the \nClearcase group. In the mean time, developers ar e syncing up their code at the end of each \nbusiness day. \n The instability of the code from the core team and having a proper deployment in dev. The profile \nteam is stubbing out the sections as necessary to move forward during this sprint. The core team \nhas relayed that their issues should be resolved by COB Monday, August 23. \n \nSprint Name: Intake - Initial Claim-Employment Hist ory Sprint 0 - Military and Federal Employment History \n Sprint Timeline: Start Date: 8/3/2010 Planne d End Date: 8/31/2010, Timeline Status: Open \n Sprint Status: The technical specifications docu ment for the Federal Employment (UCFE), Military \nEmployment (UCFX) are complete and have been revi ewed by the team. It has been discovered that the \nSearch Federal Employer will be reused by many of the Benefits sub domains. Technical analysis to \nidentify the ICON interface specifications and requ irements to send and receive messages has begun. \nAnalysis of the Employment History related domain a ttributes to map to the database attributes and user \ninterface prototype attributes has begun. The Employment History service operations as well as Core \noperations have been identified. This will be used to create the service specifications needed to begin \nservice development. The PA user interface prototypes for the Employment History use cases have been \nconverted to NY prototypes. \n Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: none \n \n \nUI Benefits Web Chat \n \nThe purpose of this proposal is to initiate a projec t to add Web Chat functionality to the UI Benefits Web \napplication for claimants. \n Current Status Report: 8/20/2010 The Customer meeting was postponed due to vacations. We are \ntracking the progress for IC upgrade which needs to be completed prior to Web Chat going live. A \ndemonstration to the Unemployment Insurance division is scheduled for next week. UI eFile Core Application & Address Change \nThis is a joint agency project where the NYS Depart ment of Labor (Labor) and the NYS Department of \nTaxation and Finance (DTF) are collaborating to deliver an Internet application for the electronic filing of \nthe NYS-45, Quarterly Combined Withholding, Wage Re porting and Unemployment Insurance return, in \ncompliance with the US Department of Labor grant proposal which will partially fund the project. The \napplication will give a population of 500,000 employers and 20,000 tax preparers the option to: complete \nand file the NYS-45 quarterly return through a w eb application, make electronic payments, upload \nemployee wage information and report a change of address via a separate web application. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 The application continues to perform well without any major issues \nencountered. Volumes continue to increase at varying rates each filing period. \n UI Employer Home Page - Consolidated Accts Receivable \n \nThe Scope of this project is to expand the functiona lity of the Employer Home Page application, which is \na live application used by NYS empl oyers seeking information rega rding their account with the \nDepartment of Labor. The current application displays profile and rate information. The UI division has \nidentified the first enhancements they would like to add to the Employer Home Page. \n They are: the addition of benefit charge information, to tal accounts receivable and list of NYS45's that are \ndelinquent. The addition of this information will reduce the bur den of L&D and EAAS staff responding to \nemployer inquiries. \nBenefit Charges: The application will display charge amount, credit charges, last 4 digits of SSN of \nclaimant, charge date, LO400 and IA96 form date. Th e application will allow a search, sort ability. \n \nAccounts Receivable: The applicati on will display the total amount owed by the employer including \nquarterly return amounts, penalties, interest to date an d rate at which interest is accruing. In addition, \ndirections on how to pay along with payment documen ts and the list of NYS45's that are delinquent will \nbe added to the screen. Current Status Report: 08/20/2010 (Agile Development Project) \n \nProject Status: The project will allow employers to view their accounts rece ivable status and benefit \ncharge information on the employer home page once they have authenticated th emselves through Labor \nOnline Services (Common Authentication). The team has completed the development and testing of the \nAccounts Receivable display functionality and will im plement it two weeks after the Labor On-Line \nServices (Common Authentication Project) is in produ ction and stable (currently estimated for the end of \nJune). \n \nThe team has completed development of the app lication and the application functionality has been \naccepted by the users. However, none of the new functionality ca n be implemented until employers can \nauthenticate who they are through Labor On-line Se rvices. The project will remain open until the \napplication is successfully deployed to production, and some minor operational activities still need to \noccur but no new sprints will be started. \n A Customer Meeting was held this week to update them on the status of the project. \n \nSprint Name: Complete development of the application code to display Benefit Charge information, record \nprotest flags and retrieve IA-96 forms stored in OnDemand and put the code through User Acceptance \ntesting. \n Sprint Timeline N/A days, Started: N/A, Planned E nd Date: N/A, Timeline Status: The sprint ended on \n3/31. \n Sprint Status: The sprint ended without being abl e to implement the code in production. \n \nActivities completed this Week: Corrected add ress caching problem that was found during ad-hoc \ntesting. The corrected code was promoted to Production and validated. \n \nProject Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None \n \nUI Employer Maintain Profile Information \n \nThis project will leverage the Pennsy lvania assets (to the extent possibl e) and existing UISIM artifacts to \ncapture Employer registration and profile information, and maintain it in the new Employer data model. \nThe new data model will be built based on the PA. data model. Wire frame screens will be developed \nfrom the PA assets and presented to the users to va lidate the PA use cases and other analysis artifacts. \nThe validated artifacts will then be used along with the existing code to develop the Registration and \nProfile maintenance services for N YSDOL. The project will also inco rporate the deliverables from the \nproposed project named UI Employer Employer Account Adjustment Section (EAAS) Transfer \nExperience. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 (Agile Development Project) \n \nProject Status: The project will deliver the processes related to an employer registering with DOL first as a \ncustomer, second as a Unemployment Insurance empl oyer, and third to maintain the employer's account \n(name, address, agents, prefer ences etc.) while they are a business in NYS. \n \nSprint Goals: Complete Validations and Error messages for the Agricultural employer screens. Develop \nscreens for Business and Domestic employers. Cr eate Staging tables. Develop requirements for an \nEmployer landing page and storing evidence. \n \nCustomer Meeting - A Customer Meeting was held this week to update them on the status of the project. \n Sprint Timeline six weeks, Started: 8/19/2010, Plan ned End Date: 9/01/2010, Timeline Status: Currently \non schedule. \n \nSprint Status: We are currently one week into the sp rint and currently scheduled to complete on time. \n \nSprint Accomplishments this Week: \n Worked on coding the screen validations fo r the Agricultural employer screens. \n Worked on developing Staging tables from the Pennsylvania data m odel for storing the \nintermediate Registration data. \n Worked on finalizing the User Interface specif ications for the Agricultural employers. \n Worked on developing the User Interface sp ecifications for the Business and Domestic \nemployers. \n Worked on developing the Business and Household Liability screens, the Business Location and \nConfirmation screens, and the Te chnical Difficulties screen. \n Worked on developing the process model for us e case 6 and use case 7 from Pennsylvania. \n Project Impediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None \n \n \nUI Employer Registration \n \nThis project will encompass the m odernization of the UI employer registration process. The scope \nincludes core processing for new registrations from all employer types, providing new interfaces for the \nvarious sources of registration, and employer profile maintenance. \n Core processing will include an automated search of the Department of Labor and the Department of \nTaxation and Finance (DTF) databases to determine if the employer already exists. It also includes \nautomated rules to determine if the sy stem can register the employer, rules for the system to determine \nliability and check for reimbursable type employers, and system creat ion and management of workflow \nwhen human tasks are required. \n The to-be processes will be modeled using the IBM Business Process Modeler. After refinement in \nconjunction with the architect group, the developers and integration team will import the models into their \ndevelopment tools to complete the business process development. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 (Agile Development Project) \n \nProject Status: UI Employer Registration Compos ite Application has been deployed to the Production \nEnvironment and is currently accepting Employer Regist rations from the Governor's Office of Regulatory \nReform (GORR). \n \nSprint Name: UI Employer Registration Go-Live; Timeline (5 weeks), Started: 6/07/2010, Planned End \nDate: 07/14/10, Timeline Status: Behind Schedule, (Ahead of Schedule, On Schedule, Behind Schedule, \nBlocked, On-Hold) \n Sprint Accomplishments this Week: \n Continued to process and monitor all GORR XMLs in the new Registration Automated system. \n Fixed the Scheduler Service; it was making duplic ate calls to the servic e, causing the duplicate \nrecords in the database. \n Emergency Request for deployment was sent. (Issue is resolved) \n Bugs Fixed: \no Unable to determine liability bug. (Payroll date is after the subject date) (Fixed & Tested \ntill staging). \no NYS100YtpeCd for accession & Update (Fixed & Tested till staging).  Email Sent to all the EREG users for their acce ss to EREG System Going live this week. (Two \nusers are having issues) \n Working on Automation Tally Emails for Accession & Updates. \n \nProject impediments impacting progress and actions to mitigate: None at this time. \nThe tentative date to begin accepting Em ployer Registrations from our DOL Internet web site is tentatively \nscheduled for Wednesday, August 25, 2010. \n \nUI Employer Tax Ledger Replacement \n This project will replace the current employer ledger with a newer, and easier to use ledger. The current \nledger was written several decades ago and is no lo nger able to efficiently handle today’s UI tax \nbusiness. Currently the ledger is not capable of ac counting for two penalty liabilities. These liabilities \nmust be maintained on a separate Penalty System. Maintenance of employer accounts is largely a \nmanual process that requires extensive training for st aff to become productive in the required tasks. \nCurrently, few adjustments to the ledger are automated. This project would also separate the financial \ninformation from that other non-financial informati on that is stored in the same file structure. \n \nThe scope of this project will include the ability to process remittance adjustments, post returns, \npayments, and voluntary payments to an Employer Account, create employer payments online, perform \ndaily remittance balancing, and interface with NYS Department of Taxation and Finance late filer \ninformation and Failure to file data. \n It will also include the ability to generate an on-demand co unt of the number of employers that would be \nconsidered delinquent at the given point in time that the query is execut ed, produce a daily pre-\ndelinquency count and store the information for revi ew, select employers to receive a pre-delinquency \nnotice (NYS45G) and generate a sample of the data to be printed on the NYS45G. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 Agile Development \n \nSchedule: POC Sprint: June 21, 2010 until Sept 30, 2010: In Progress \n Status Summary: The team identified the Post Rece ivables to Ledger and the Pay Benefits Use Cases to \nbe modeled and presented to UID customer. The proj ect EPAS resource has exec uted code for the Post \nReceivable to Ledger. Additional questions were generated and documented for the PA Architect. A spreadsheet was started that will document what methods are calling other components. The team is \nclose to understanding the ledger update proces s. The customer status meeting was held. \n \nAccomplishments: \n Two transaction types for presentati on to the customer were identified. \n Modeling of the Employer and Benefits Us e Cases and transactions continued. \n \n \nUI Systems Improvement Project The purpose of the Unemployment Insurance Systems Improvement (UISIM) Initiative is to design, \ndevelop, test and implement a new comprehensive system design for a new Unemployment Insurance System. \n \nThe base computer software system s that run the nearly $3.5 billi on New York State Unemployment \nInsurance (UI) program today were originally written more than 30 years ago, using languages and file \nstructures that are not easily maintainable or eas ily adaptable to current technologies, such as self-\nservice applications via the Internet. Modification s and enhancements have been made to these systems \nover the years; however, these existing systems cann ot effectively and efficiently support the demands being placed on the Unemployment Insurance Divisi on (UID). The total system to be developed will be \ntailored to meet or exceed New York State UID needs. The goal is to replace the existing capabilities with \na new system(s) that will be able to sup port the UI program into the future. \n Current Status Report : 08/20/2010 Projects Currently In-Progr ess - see individual project reports for \nstatus details. \n Status: UISIm activities continued for Core Fou ndational, Employer, Benefits and Appeals domains using \nthe PA analysis, design and development assets. We c ontinue to maintain a utility metric spreadsheet on \nthe completeness of the development of use case func tionality for UISIm. We held a customer meeting \nwith UI Divsion directors and st akeholders this week. Our next customer meeting is scheduled for \nThursday, September 2nd. \n \nLegacy (System Improvement) Projects: \n Unemployment Insurance eFile Core Application and Address Change \n Virtual Call Queuing Callback Manager Project \n xPression Implementation (LGAS Replacement) \n Address Normalization \n Additional Claims \n Federal Tax Offset \n UI Benefits Web Chat \n UISIm Core Technical Foundational Projects: \n Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Security and Monitoring \n Common Authentication / Identity Management \n EA Foundational Services \n UISIm Core Functional Foundational Projects: \n Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board System Replacement \n Unemployment Insurance Benefit Ledger \n Unemployment Insurance Tax Ledger \n UISIm Functional Employer Account Projects: \n Unemployment Insurance Employer Registration \n Unemployment Insurance Tax Rating \n Unemployment Insurance Automate Multi-Year Tax Rating \n Unemployment Insurance Employer Ho me Page Consolidated Accounts Receivable \n Audit and Investigation Case Management System \n UI Modernize Employer (Program) for DOLC MS: UISIm - Maintain Employer Profile \n \nUISIm Functional Benefit Account Projects: \n Unemployment Insurance Benefit Intake (including Shared Work) \n Unemployment Insur ance Certification \n Unemployment Insurance Adjudication \n \n \nUI Tax Rating - Automate Multi-Year Tax Rating Process \n The scope of this project is the migration of Cúram and Rating Workbook transaction data from the \nmainframe into the Enterprise Data Model. Analyz e this data and design the multi-year BCA (Benefit \nCharge Adjustment) of the UI Employer Tax rating proc ess. Building on the original UI Tax Rate Project \nbase functionality, extend the single year BCA tax ra ting processes to allow multi-year BCA tax rating \nprocesses to be performed. The approach that will be used to complete this proj ect begins with the UI Tax Rating Core Project team \nscoping out bodies of work to be passed off to agile teams. The agile teams consisting of developers and \nanalysts will be formed for the duration required to co mplete each body of work. The bodies of work will \nbe scoped out so that they can be completed in 20 da y time frames. Each body of work (iteration) will \nconsist of a complete deliverable. The first bodies of work to be assigned to the agile teams are: migrate \nCúram tax rating system data from the mainframe to the enterprise data model; migrate Rating \nWorkbooks data from the mainframe to the enterpr ise data model; analyze the migrated data for use in \nsupporting multi-year BCA processes; design the multi-year BCA tax rating processes. \n \nThere will also be a core team of developers and analys ts formed for the duration of the entire project. \nThe core team will be responsible for overseeing and coordinating the work done by each of the agile \nteams and delivering the final complete product. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/2010 (Agile Development Project) \n Project Status: The project will allow users to perfor m prior/multiple year tax rating operations in a \nproduction WebSphere Application Server (WAS) environment, and is scheduled to complete in \nDecember of 2010. The team met with the product owner this week to update them on the status of the project. \n \nSprint Goals: Convert Total Transfer and Void To tal Transfer transactions from Curam into the new \nEnterprise database, Develop Determination of Liab ility process, and develop prior year simple Total \nTransfer and Void Total Transfer of experience process. \n Sprint Timeline six weeks, Started: N/A, Planned End Date: N/A, Timeline Status: N/A. \n \nSprint Status: The sprint completed on 8/13. Planning is underway for the next sprint. \n \nSprint Accomplishments this Week: \n Worked on correcting the Experience Rating subjec t date for employers that are the successor in \na Partial Transfer of experience. \n Completed the conversion of Curam transaction (about 9,000 records) into the Test environment \nand worked with the Analysts to validat e the converted transactions. \n Completed the loading of 2007 - 2009 Voluntar y Contribution Negative Balance Adjustment \ntransactions into the Development environment. \n Worked on analyzing the workbook data from 2007 - 2010 loaded into Oracle Staging tables. \n Worked on Developer testing of the Determinations of Liability and Subject Date Change code. \n Worked on analyzing how to handle the end/beginni ng of year application locks. \n Completed the second round of formal testing t he prior year Total Transfer and prior year Void \ntotal transfer processes in the Test environment. \n Corrected the defects that were identifie d and deployed the corrected code to the Test \nenvironment. \n \nImpediments Impacting Progress and Actions to Mitigate: None \n \n \nUI Virtual Call Queuing Callback Manager Project \n \nThe Unemployment Insurance Division (UID) has moved from a local office model for claims intake, to a self-service model. As such, the primary means of receiving Unemployment Insurance claims is through \nthe Internet and through Interactive Voice Response (IVR). Many claims that are submitted through the \nIVR are incomplete. Claimants complete their applications by calling the Department of Labor and \nverbally completing the application with the help of a Telephone Call Center (TCC) Agent. TCC Agents \ninput the remaining claim information into the Unempl oyment Insurance computer system as they speak \nwith the claimants. There are two TCCs in the D epartment of Labor. One is in Glendale, NY and the other is in Troy, NY. The two call centers are in a Virtual Call Center (VCC) configuration. There are \napproximately 250 total TCC Agents. Calls are routed to one of the two centers wh ere the application is \ncompleted with the assistance of an Agent. Many requests for information and claim status are also \nreceived in the TCCs. \nThe volume of calls received in the Telephone Call Centers varies. Monday sees the highest volume. \nMass layoffs and poor economic conditions also creat e a high volume of calls to the TCCs. During those \npeak volume periods, claimants may wait an excessive amount of time before connecting to an Agent. \nThis causes unnecessary 800 line costs and disgru ntled claimants due to perceived poor customer \nservice. \nThe Unemployment Insurance Division has investigated Virtual Call Queuing Management software to \nalleviate issues created by variable peaks in TCC call volumes. Virtual Call Queuing Management \nsoftware is capable of allowing a claimant to disconnect and yet maintain their place in the incoming call \nqueue. When an Agent becomes available, the syst em calls the claimant and makes the connection to \nthe Agent. Software that has been investigated thus far also has the option of allowing claimants to \nschedule a call back at a date and time t hat is convenient for the claimant. \n The purpose of this project is to: Develop a set of business and technical requirements needed to \ndetermine the hardware, software and associated cost estimates for a Virtual Call Queuing Management \nsystem for the Unemployment Insurance Division's Telephone Call Centers. Procure software and hardware necessary for implem enting a Virtual Call Queuing Management system \nfor the Unemployment Insurance Division. \nInstall, configure and test Virtual Call Queuing Management products. Implement the Virtual Call Queuing Management system by training the UI Division administrators and \nstaff, preparing for ongoing Planning and Technology s upport, and transitioning th e products into the \nproduction environment. \nCurrent Status Report: 08/20/10 A meeting was conducted to disc uss results of the assessment of the \ncall queuing software. Several options were present ed to improve performance. No decision has been \nmade yet on what will be the next step. A design me eting was held to review in more detail the steps \ninvolved in the software upgrade part of this proj ect. There are several outstanding items that more \ninformation is needed on but so far we have not ident ified any major issues. We have decided that the \nvendors can have VPN access to the servers for loading the software and doing the configuration and \ncustom coding work. The paper work to enable this to happen is quickly going through the system. Port assignment and network firewall requirements for the va rious servers are being finalized. Next week we \nwill provide the vendor a test of the current system so that they can see how the screen pops and agent \nworkstation currently works. \n \n \nUnix Servers Admin \n We are proposing to purchase two Power6 595’s. One of the P6 595 will be used for our \nProduction/Staging environment to provide readily avail able hardware resources for our SOA initiative. A \nthird P6 595 will be used for Development/Testing/Di saster Recovery environment. We are also \nrequesting to upgrade our P5 -570’s with additional memory and storage. \n In addition, the Building 12 server room is in need of improvements to address issues with inadequate \ncooling capacity, security, replacement of floor t iles and re-cabling. We propose moving the current \nserver room from BD – 4 to BD-15, as this space would require less investment to bring up to date to \nmeet our current needs. \n \nThe NYS Department of Labor (NYS DOL) relies heavily on the AIX server environment to support the \ndevelopment of J2EE applications that run on WebSphere Application Serv er. With the implementation of \na service oriented architecture and the advent of UISIM these systems are at capacity and require additional hardware. The current systems will not be able to support expected growth in development \nand operation of modernized applications and/or services. \n \nThe B-12 server room in BD-4 is in need of moder nization and the space is very limited in terms of \nallowing for future growth. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/20 The CTIP database server has move from P690 to P650. The \npaperwork to decommission the P690 has been submitted. Installation of monitoring software continues. \n Videoconferencing Phase 2 \n \nTo expand on our initial implementation of video confer encing we need to add additional capabilities to \nfacilitate ease of meetings between DOL sta ff in geographically dispersed locations. \n Current Status Report: 08/20/10 A weekly meeting was held to discuss implementation and locations. \nWe have identified which units should be inclu ded in the next phase of implementation the asset \nmanagement request is being completed.. \n \nVMware View User Mobility 2010 \n The purpose of this project is to provide a technica l infrastructure to enable Department of Labor (DOL) \nstaff to access and use DOL resources from home or alternate work locations. \nBy providing a virtual desktop computing environment accessible world wide via secure socket layer \n(SSL) virtual private network (VPN), DOL staff will have portable envi ronments capable of working from \nany location where Internet network connectivity is available. A us er will be able to access their desktop \nand files from any location provided they have an Internet connection. \n All data will reside on Department of Labor owne d storage devices. All vi rtual desktops could be \ndownloaded or accessed by staff using a variety of hardware in a secure environment. This virtual \nsolution is capable of being interfaced with disaster re covery solutions, with minimal effort as compared to \nother options. \n Current Status Report: 08/20/2010 All of the project hardwar e and software purchase requests have \nbeen created. Requests have got the budget approvals. Team started work on Solution Architecture. \nTeam is waiting for goods to arrive. \n \nVoice Web Server Replacement \n The purpose of this project is to test possibilities for the replacemen t of the Virtual Call Center (VCC) \nServers and replace them. \nThe current VCC servers are over 6 years old and in need of replacement. The specific cards that allow \nthe voice communication with the end user are not supported on modern operating systems and need to \nbe replaced. An initial investigation has also identif ied that the Websphere Voice Server (WVS) is at end \nof life and will no longer be supported by the vendor . A replacement to WVS needs to be identified. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 The customer meeting was postponed this week due to vacations. \nThe technical team continues establishing the test se rver by transferring the so ftware from the server. \nOnce the server is established we will test the software. It is anticipated that this testing will occur next \nweek. \n \n WIA Financial Management \nDevelop a system that will allow the Local Workforce Investment Areas (LWIAs) to request the drawdown \nof cash to operate their programs on a month-to-month basis and for the LWIAs to report on their monthly \nexpenditures. \nThe New York State Department of Labor is required by Workforce Investment Act (WIA) regulations to \noperate a fiscal and management accountability inform ation system as one of the Statewide Workforce \nInvestment Activities. The system must record and report on financial activities involving the Local \nWorkforce Investment Areas (LWIAs). The component of the system that reco rds and monitors the daily \nLWIA cash drawdown requests has been completed; however, the cash side of the system has not been \nmade available to LWIAs pending completion of t he expenditure side. The Local Area Expenditure \nReporting component of the system needs to be co mpleted pending a few modifications to be fully \nfunctional for reporting purposes. The expenditure re porting function of the system will allow the thirty-\nthree LWIAs to report their required monthly expenditu res and obligations online. This system will contain \nstandard reporting formats with appropriate edits, checks and balances to produce the cumulative \nexpenditure and obligation information needed to a ccurately complete the required federal financial \nreports. The expenditure information that is report ed electronically will also be exported to the Financial \nAccounting and Reporting System (FARS) to be prop erly accounted for in the Department of Labor's \nofficial designated accounting system. \n \nCurrent Status Report: This project has been on hold since 7/18/2008 due to resource conflicts. \n \n \nWIA Incentive Grant - Updates to JobZone \n NYSDOL and NYSED co-authored an application and were awarded a WIA Incentiv e Grant supporting \nthe NYSED Literacy Zone initiative. Among the fund ed deliverables are upgrade s and revisions to the \nJobZone system and the development of a desktop a pplication mirroring the core functions of the \nJobZone website. \n The Offline JobZone application should include: \n1. Searchable occupational profile s based on the latest available ve rsion of the O*NET database \n2. Occupational Videos \n3. Searchable, by name and major, college profiles using latest available information from IPEDS \nand CIP databases. \n4. Journal module to document job search efforts, including contacts, prospects, appointments, and \nplans. Modeled on the form available at \nhttp://www.labor.state.ny.us/workforcenypartners/PDFs/WorkSearchRecord.pdf \n5. The Assess Yourself, Interest Profiler, Work Importance Prof iler, and Skill Survey modules as \ncurrently found in JobZone. \n6. A resume builder tool incorporating such common fields as, Contact Info, Work Experience, \nSummary of Qualifications, Volunteer Exper ience, Education History, Awards and \nAccomplishments, Licenses and Certifications, Pr ofessional Associations and Military History. \n7. Cover Letter Builder 8. Reference list builder \n9. Resource list specific to an incarcerated population including such information as contact \ninformation for ex-offender advocacy agencies, in fo on obtaining vital records (e.g., ID, Birth \nCertificate, Social Security ca rd), occupational restrictions du e to conviction history, etc. \n \nA sign-in and storage mechanism to save customer search activities and records acro ss multiple sessions \n \nCurrent Status Report: 8/20/2010 Analysis work sessions continues. Detail analysis on the JobZone \nrequirements for both the web and off line versions continue. A risk analysis has been performed. \nThe approach for development is being planned. The requirements will be prioritized and estimates \nprovided to select the order of development. The weekly Customer meeting was conducted. \n \nxPression Implementation \n \nThis project is to implement the Document Corr espondence software xPression in our open systems \nenvironment. The first program area to use this so ftware is Unemployment Insurance - Employer. It will \nreplace their mainframe based correspondence letter writ ing system. The new system will also interface \nwith the NYS Department of Labor's Electronic Docu ment Management system fo r storing/archiving of \ndocument images. \n \nCurrent Status Report: 08/06/10 08/20/10 We are still working on content errors and prioritizing the \nenhancement requests for the future. We have set up we ekly meetings to review priority and progress. \nAs soon as our users all have Windows 2007, we will turn over the maintenance of content errors to the \ngroups that own the docum ents. Our next effort will be to test and implement the code that allows the \nuser to maintain the user access and document maintenance. \n " }

[ -0.12699060142040253, -0.015628423541784286, 0.030668891966342926, 0.018172256648540497, 0.06283753365278244, -0.055263374000787735, 0.07556022703647614, 0.04860897362232208, -0.06500893086194992, -0.00989709235727787, -0.03253582864999771, 0.016194315627217293, -0.03312179446220398, 0.010040031746029854, -0.0030661998316645622, -0.004557851701974869, 0.0693274587392807, 0.0006428215419873595, 0.024601217359304428, 0.07057169824838638, 0.09493128210306168, 0.011271966621279716, 0.036316175013780594, 0.00540828425437212, 0.0066403355449438095, 0.04641743376851082, -0.06505730003118515, 0.0874689593911171, -0.029248284175992012, -0.022350775077939034, -0.029212957248091698, 0.0782715380191803, -0.05406814441084862, -0.06715300679206848, 0.06551932543516159, 0.03952810913324356, -0.09809332340955734, 0.013078168034553528, 0.011024948209524155, 0.015431873500347137, 0.008510584011673927, -0.04953516274690628, -0.04295264557003975, 0.018241193145513535, -0.10308331996202469, -0.08669877797365189, 0.07597947120666504, -0.02616201527416706, -0.03195115551352501, 0.017318474128842354, 0.04996012896299362, 0.0643763318657875, -0.08175868541002274, -0.026419376954436302, -0.0661778673529625, -0.1131303608417511, 0.052120693027973175, -0.017703186720609665, 0.009640558622777462, -0.025708233937621117, 0.04834290221333504, 0.047030963003635406, -0.02816351316869259, -0.041411299258470535, 0.10745619982481003, 0.04036273807287216, 0.012147054076194763, -0.06871893256902695, 0.06309543550014496, -0.05176147073507309, 0.02941310778260231, -0.0029810687992721796, 0.05958795174956322, 0.09608842432498932, -0.04449402168393135, 0.0752401128411293, 0.05290818586945534, -0.029692962765693665, -0.10370815545320511, 0.015186123549938202, -0.044269900768995285, 0.0979384183883667, -0.015301194973289967, -0.021369678899645805, 0.025578614324331284, -0.015033907257020473, -0.07070402801036835, 0.05125167593359947, -0.011987362056970596, -0.0155137088149786, 0.07948168367147446, 0.1357668787240982, -0.04874502122402191, 0.001794308191165328, 0.054677564650774, 0.019549189135432243, 0.050965942442417145, 0.0015037035336717963, -0.013438878580927849, -0.01510138250887394, 0.02628018893301487, 0.03091355785727501, -0.10140220075845718, -0.05949299782514572, 0.0017116159433498979, -0.012615269050002098, -0.004531824495643377, -0.015220943838357925, 0.06137176975607872, 0.11368172615766525, -0.08176223933696747, 0.04279079660773277, -0.08014436066150665, 0.01296777930110693, -0.11237353831529617, -0.04236049950122833, -0.010646183043718338, 0.007998324930667877, 0.035988617688417435, 0.02519756555557251, 0.019683875143527985, -0.03947921097278595, 0.0354006327688694, 0.03138820454478264, 0.0046033491380512714, -0.08005346357822418, -0.02728774957358837, 1.094816132763523e-33, -0.07884354889392853, 0.047464191913604736, -0.0003603544901125133, 0.02008328028023243, -0.06264768540859222, 0.04381371662020683, 0.02755487523972988, -0.04046114534139633, 0.0032968849409371614, -0.008612998761236668, -0.017518052831292152, 0.013772808015346527, -0.04151400923728943, 0.09189849346876144, -0.030118411406874657, 0.013397072441875935, 0.03443675488233566, -0.00003771372212213464, 0.019616950303316116, -0.058460962027311325, 0.0020421689841896296, -0.013802585192024708, 0.019082767888903618, 0.07297466695308685, 0.02343256212770939, 0.05978525057435036, -0.09318659454584122, 0.05554358661174774, 0.0035816379822790623, 0.013284659944474697, 0.10807711631059647, 0.010471087880432606, 0.05408065393567085, -0.024593541398644447, -0.010034965351223946, -0.007298669777810574, -0.08529247343540192, -0.015270859934389591, -0.010164042934775352, -0.02203563041985035, -0.05080500990152359, -0.01490611582994461, 0.14777754247188568, 0.05237289518117905, -0.004365462344139814, -0.04078749567270279, -0.0562392920255661, 0.07679037004709244, -0.043215058743953705, -0.06812072545289993, 0.03820040449500084, -0.002520571229979396, -0.09987784922122955, 0.04830015078186989, -0.022424429655075073, -0.025588328018784523, 0.01690676435828209, -0.12068606168031693, -0.02485557831823826, 0.013461785390973091, 0.04290451109409332, 0.073889821767807, 0.03469742834568024, 0.03129342198371887, -0.016952499747276306, -0.025961140170693398, -0.01951882615685463, 0.06978560239076614, -0.012237517163157463, -0.04223819449543953, 0.0019295875681564212, 0.008732359856367111, 0.0344330258667469, 0.07454581558704376, -0.05504520237445831, -0.008008457720279694, 0.12320718169212341, -0.0914362296462059, 0.06699966639280319, -0.028164101764559746, -0.0495537705719471, -0.06806394457817078, 0.015261492691934109, -0.09236748516559601, -0.10837866365909576, 0.004601027816534042, 0.06022600457072258, -0.008329123258590698, -0.010491063818335533, -0.018085578456521034, 0.012216074392199516, -0.06131890416145325, -0.07216639071702957, -0.04596404358744621, -0.10641171783208847, -2.5131266578344086e-33, 0.0653022974729538, 0.01116925198584795, 0.058039143681526184, -0.01866753399372101, -0.00803639180958271, -0.03592943027615547, -0.002408956177532673, -0.037790462374687195, -0.010307049378752708, -0.0019169589504599571, 0.025271620601415634, -0.032057978212833405, 0.04107678309082985, -0.013013163581490517, -0.006604478694498539, 0.057036325335502625, 0.0062191602773964405, -0.022873086854815483, -0.018350539728999138, -0.030846944078803062, -0.016634931787848473, -0.004417748656123877, -0.03380204737186432, -0.008979595266282558, -0.04742409288883209, -0.08334466069936752, -0.041097186505794525, -0.06959488242864609, -0.03572129085659981, 0.015210423618555069, -0.009029338136315346, 0.029062295332551003, -0.006979528348892927, 0.021933680400252342, 0.0010899099288508296, -0.06740714609622955, 0.02376824989914894, -0.036116041243076324, 0.0011005076812580228, -0.01126759685575962, 0.06648392230272293, -0.0025217346847057343, -0.01868686079978943, -0.005021017510443926, -0.11226858198642731, -0.033517759293317795, 0.01913004368543625, 0.017014918848872185, 0.11746517568826675, 0.0755307525396347, 0.1682608425617218, -0.007490159478038549, 0.03771906718611717, -0.020445171743631363, 0.021798880770802498, 0.053557153791189194, -0.04180465638637543, -0.018099619075655937, -0.07626210153102875, 0.0028511907439678907, 0.10428545624017715, 0.10294945538043976, 0.007856360636651516, 0.0028550722636282444, 0.05554995685815811, 0.01901092566549778, 0.04210487753152847, 0.038094621151685715, -0.029952360317111015, 0.06558296829462051, 0.08772680163383484, 0.024183927103877068, 0.0003748234885279089, -0.024030586704611778, 0.010054003447294235, -0.027060380205512047, 0.04045403376221657, 0.041272856295108795, -0.026491515338420868, -0.047350332140922546, 0.053913380950689316, 0.03667760267853737, -0.01673515886068344, -0.02670145221054554, 0.089348703622818, 0.005771993193775415, 0.01437039952725172, 0.11248429119586945, 0.06364971399307251, 0.000006083763764763717, -0.0009355987422168255, -0.034293051809072495, 0.014986307360231876, 0.024390719830989838, 0.05169306695461273, -4.6947942422548294e-8, -0.04255533590912819, 0.05026347562670708, -0.01964334398508072, -0.0269604679197073, -0.04581821709871292, 0.026758546009659767, 0.07267723977565765, -0.040931276977062225, -0.007407216355204582, -0.029485026374459267, -0.02041509933769703, -0.008304724469780922, -0.06796818971633911, -0.023911330848932266, -0.0018886490724980831, -0.015199091285467148, -0.024275749921798706, 0.016453489661216736, -0.0024695093743503094, -0.08868087828159332, -0.046889208257198334, -0.0036882308777421713, -0.055531904101371765, 0.0013781770830973983, 0.017317671328783035, 0.062010884284973145, 0.029659627005457878, 0.08084773272275925, -0.025344133377075195, 0.08980228006839752, 0.007673211861401796, -0.05917983874678612, 0.0018034117529168725, -0.055329907685518265, 0.05024677887558937, 0.06965702772140503, 0.019404545426368713, -0.05226592347025871, -0.07698686420917511, 0.04262181371450424, -0.029951825737953186, -0.03336917236447334, -0.020660966634750366, 0.002656030934303999, 0.011722133494913578, -0.041480906307697296, -0.19088320434093475, 0.07251331955194473, -0.04169638082385063, 0.05879926681518555, 0.06401173025369644, 0.009376042522490025, -0.02144203707575798, -0.0016804194310680032, -0.013959405943751335, 0.04650275409221649, 0.013804733753204346, 0.03014463372528553, -0.06293107569217682, -0.03747779503464699, 0.048196516931056976, -0.07087365537881851, 0.026904016733169556, 0.0042210714891552925 ]

{ "pdf_file": "FC2VGRC55DZ77QA4O5L7DPBQEUDIQG52.pdf", "text": "TALC AND PYROPHYLLITE—1999 76.1TALC AND PYROPHYLLITE\nBy Robert L. Virta\nDomestic survey data and tables were prepared by Christopher H. Lindsay, statistical assistant, and the world production\ntable was prepared by Glenn J. Wallace, international data coordinator.\nThe mineral talc is a hydrous magnesium silicate. A massive\ntalcose rock is called steatite, and an impure massive variety is\nknown as soapstone. Talc is used commercially because of its\nfragrance retention, luster, purity, softness, and whiteness. \nOther commercially important properties of talc are its\nchemical inertness, high dielectric strength, high thermal\nconductivity, low electrical conductivity, and oil and grease\nadsorption. Major markets for talc are ceramics, paint, paper,\nand plastics.\nPyrophyllite is a hydrous aluminum silicate with a structure\nsimilar to talc. Such properties as chemical inertness, high\ndielectric strength, high melting point, and low electrical\nconductivity make it useful for ceramic and refractory\napplications.\nLegislation and Government Programs\nIn 1999, the U.S. Department of Defense authorized the\ndisposal of 907 metric tons (t) of block and lump talc from the\nNational Defense Stockpile, which is the entire uncommitted\ninventory in that category; 2 t was sold.\nProduction\nTalc.— In 1999, 9 companies operating 13 mines in 6 States\nproduced soapstone, steatite, and talc. All but one operation\nwere open pit mines. The producers were, in decreasing order\nof production, Luzenac America Inc., Barrett’s Minerals Inc.,\nDal Minerals Co., Gouverneur Talc Co., Milwhite Inc.,\nSuzorite Mineral Products Inc. (Zemex Corp.), Unimin Texas\nCo. L.P. (formerly United Clays Inc. of Texas), Steatite of\nSouthern Oregon, and NuTECH Minerals Inc. Barrett’s\nMinerals, Dal Minerals, Gouverneur Talc, and Luzenac\nAmerica were the largest domestic producers, accounting for\nmore than 80% of the tonnage.\nIn 1999, U.S. mine production was 925,000 t valued at $26.1\nmillion, compared with 971,000 t valued at $27.3 million in\n1998 (tables 1 and 2). Production increased slightly in New\nYork; decreased in California, Montana, Texas, and Vermont;\nand remained unchanged in Oregon. Montana led all States in\nthe tonnage and value of talc produced, followed by Texas,\nVermont, New York, Oregon, and California. Mines that\noperated in Montana, New York, Texas, and Vermont\naccounted for nearly all the domestic talc production.\nDomestic production data were obtained through a voluntary\nU.S. Geological Survey (USGS) survey of U.S. mining\ncompanies. Survey forms were sent to 10 companies with\nresponses accounting for approximately 80% of the datapresented in table 1; the remainder was estimated from reported\nprior-year data adjusted according to industry trends.\nPyrophyllite.— Standard Industrial Minerals Inc. operated\none mine in California, and Piedmont Minerals Co. and\nStandard Mineral Co. Inc. operated three mines in North\nCarolina. Production of pyrophyllite decreased from that of\n1998.\nDomestic production data were acquired through a voluntary\nUSGS survey of the three U.S. companies that mine\npyrophyllite. All responded to the survey.\nConsumption\nTalc.— Approximately 881,000 t of talc valued at $102\nmillion was sold or used in 1999, an increase from 870,000 t\nvalued at $109 million in 1998. Sales or use of talc increased\nin Montana and Texas; decreased in California, New York, and\nVermont; and remained essentially unchanged in Oregon. Of\nthe 881,000 t of talc sold or used, producers reported that\n771,000 t was sold for domestic use and approximately 110,000\nt was exported.\nDomestic markets included, in decreasing order of\nconsumption, ceramics (pottery, sanitaryware, tiles, etc.),\npaper, paint, plastics, roofing, cosmetics, rubber, insecticides,\nand refractories (table 3). Domestic sales of talc did not change\nsignificantly between 1998 and 1999.\nAbout 73,000 t of talc was reported under the “Other”\ncategory by respondents in 1999. Of this amount, 55,600 t was\nused in animal feed additives, automobile body fillers, caulks,\njoint compounds, paint and putties, sculpture media, tile\nflooring, and vinyl sheet flooring. The remainder of the\n“Other” category (17,400 t) was used in applications that were\nnot identified by respondents.\nMost of the imported talc was not included in the domestic\nend-use data listed in table 3. More than 80% of the imported\ntalc was purchased by mineral brokers who do not participate in\nthe USGS canvass. An estimate of the end-use breakdown\nbased on countries of origin, ports of entry, importing\ncompanies, and regional end-use patterns is ceramics and\nrefractories, 15,000 t; cosmetics, 8,000 t; paint, 31,000 t; paper,\n12,000 t; plastics, 80,000 t; rubber, 9,000 t; and unknown,\n23,000 t.\nPyrophyllite.— Domestic consumption of pyrophyllite\ndecreased from that of 1998. Pyrophyllite was used, in\ndecreasing order of consumption, in ceramics, refractories,\npaint, plastics, insecticides, and rubber. Sales increased for\npaint and plastics applications and decreased for the others. \nCeramic and refractory uses accounted for 61% of domestic U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK—1999 76.2pyrophyllite sales.\nDomestic consumption data for talc and pyrophyllite were\ndeveloped by the USGS from a voluntary survey of U.S. mills. \nSurvey forms were sent to 11 companies operating 16 mills in 8\nStates for talc and 3 companies operating 3 mills in 2 States for\npyrophyllite. Approximately 87% of the talc data presented in\ntable 3 was reported by the companies; the remainder was\nestimated from reported prior-year data adjusted according to\nindustry trends. All the pyrophyllite producers responded to\nthe consumption survey.\nPrices\nTalc prices varied depending on the quality and the degree\nand method of processing. The unit value of crude talc was\nestimated to be $28 per metric ton. More than 80% of the\ncrude ore value included in table 1 was estimated because most\nproducers do not sell crude talc and could not provide a crude\nore value. The average reported unit value of processed talc\nwas $116 per ton. The average unit values of crude and\nprocessed pyrophyllite increased slightly in 1999.\nThe average unit value for exports of unmilled talc was $114\nper ton, and that of milled talc was $195 per ton. The average\nunit value for imports was $83 per ton for unground talc, $161\nper ton for ground talc, and $932 per ton for cut or sawed talc.\nBidding for export licenses on 250,000 t of Chinese talc took\nplace in March 1999. Licenses, in general, increased about $8\nper ton to $20 per ton. Industry experts believe that much of\nthe increase in licensing costs could be absorbed through cost\nreductions by Chinese talc producers (Mineral PriceWatch,\n1999).\nApproximate prices for talc ranged from $83 to $371 per ton\n(table 4; Industrial Minerals, 1999d). Quoted prices should be\nused only as a guideline because actual prices depend on the\nterms of the contract between seller and buyer.\nForeign Trade\nTalc exports increased slightly in tonnage, to 147,000 t, and\n5% in value, to $27.2 million. Canada was the leading\nimporter of U.S. talc, followed by Mexico, Belgium, Japan,\nVenezuela (7,220 t), and Taiwan (4,560 t) (table 5). Since\n1990, data reported by domestic producers concerning exports\nto Mexico gradually have diverged from the Bureau of the\nCensus data. On the basis of industry data, exports to Mexico\nare estimated to be more than three times those reported by the\nBureau of the Census.\nTalc imports reported by the Bureau of the Census increased\nby 26% in tonnage, to 208,000 t, and increased by 52% in\nvalue, to $35.3 million. Such a large tonnage increase probably\ncould not be absorbed by current talc markets and it is likely\nthat much was processed and stockpiled for future sales. Cut\nand sawed talc, which has a unit value of $932 per ton,\ncontributed disproportionately to the large increase in the\nimport value compared with import values for unmilled and\nmilled talc. Canada, China, France, and Japan supplied 89% of all talc imports (table 6). Some of the talc imported from Japan\nwas likely to have been transshipments from other Southeast\nAsian countries or Australia.\nApproximately 50% (103,000 t) of talc imported into the\nUnited States came through the port district of New Orleans,\nLA, almost all unmilled. Of this amount, 6,700 t was imported\nfrom Australia; 86,700 t from China; 68 t from France; 8,990 t\nfrom Hong Kong; and 244 t from Italy. The second leading\nport district was Detroit, MI, with 25,400 t (principally from\nCanada); followed by Boston, MA, with 21,000 t (principally\nfrom France); and Buffalo, NY, with 12,400 t (principally from\nCanada). The remaining imports were scattered among the\nmany other port districts.\nWorld Review\nChina remained the world’s leading producer of talc,\nfollowed by the United States, Brazil, India, Finland, and\nFrance. The Republic of Korea was the largest producer of\npyrophyllite, followed by Japan and Brazil. China, Japan, the\nRepublic of Korea, and the United States produced 69% of the\nworld’s talc and pyrophyllite (table 7).\nAustralia.— WMC Resources Ltd. announced plans to build\nan $11 million mill with a capacity of 35,000 to 40,000 metric\ntons per year (t/yr) at either its Three Springs or Kwinana site. \nThe mill will permit WMC to use talc from its Three Springs\nmine for higher value applications. The paper and paint\nmarkets in Australia and Southeast Asia are being served by the\ncompany’s Amsterdam plant (Industrial Minerals, 1999e).\nCanada.— Highwood Resources Ltd. acquired a talc mine\nand mill from Canada Talc Ltd. The mine and mill are located\nin Madoc, Ontario. Highwood Resources is beginning\nunderground development at the mine to improve access to\nhigher grade ore. The company also is upgrading the mill\nfacilities (Industrial Minerals, 1999b).\nTrinity Resources and Energy Ltd. began preparing its\npyrophyllite mine and mill, which have been idle since 1995,\nfor operation. In 1998, the company acquired the mine and\nmill, located in Newfoundland, from Armstrong World\nIndustries Canada Ltd. The purchase included the mine, mill,\n1 million tons of reserves, and ceramic- and mixed-grade\nstocks. The company expects to be fully operational in 2000\nand intends to diversify from ceramics into pigment and filler\nmarkets, such as paint, plastic, and roofing (North American\nMinerals News, 1999).\nItaly.— Luzenac Val Chisone SpA opened an underground\nmine in Rodoretto. The deposit contains high-purity, white,\nmacrocrystalline ore. Luzenac anticipates that production will\nbe 60,000 t/yr. The talc will be sold for polymer, cosmetic,\npharmaceutical, and coating applications (Industrial Minerals,\n1999c).\nMexico.— Luzenac Europe acquired 51% ownership of\nSierra Talc de Mexico, SA de CV. Sierra Talc is a toll\ngrinding operation with an average output of 40,000 t/yr. It has\nmines in Guerrero and Puebla and mills in Monterrey and\nMexico City. The company mines about 10% of its feed TALC AND PYROPHYLLITE—1999 76.3material with the remainder obtained from other producers\n(Industrial Minerals, 1999a).\nOutlook\nMarkets for talc should be stable and even slightly increasing\nfor the next few years. Major markets for talc, such as\nceramics, paint, paper, and plastics, are projected to grow\nslowly through 2003 as a result of the strong U.S. economy. \nThe plastics market should continue to offer the greatest growth\npotential for talc, and imports will play a larger role in the U.S.\ntalc market. No major changes are anticipated in pyrophyllite\nmarkets, and consumption probably will not change\nsignificantly for the next few years.\nReferences Cited\nIndustrial Minerals, 1999a, ...And acquires majority stake in Sierra Talc: \nIndustrial Minerals, no. 378, March, p. 9.\n———1999b, Canada Talc bought by Highwood Resources: Industrial Minerals,\nno. 378, March, p. 9.\n———1999c, Luzenac opens talc mine in Italy: Industrial Minerals, no. 378,\nMarch, p. 21.\n———1999d, Prices: Industrial Minerals, no. 387, December, p. 71.\n———1999e, WMC to build new talc mill: Industrial Minerals, no. 381, June, p.\n106.\nMineral PriceWatch, 1999, Talc—Second round results released: MineralPriceWatch, no. 52, April, p. 2.\nNorth American Minerals News, 1999, Trinity Resources and Energy: North\nAmerican Minerals News, no. 44, January, p. 7-8.\nGENERAL SOURCES OF INFORMATION\nU.S. Geological Survey Publications\nTalc and pyrophyllite. Ch. in Mineral Commodity Summaries,\nannual.1\nTalc. Ch. in United States Mineral Resources, Professional\nPaper 820, 1973.\nOther\nCeramic Industry.\nEngineering and Mining Journal.\nMining Engineering.\nPaint and Coatings Industry.\nTalc and pyrophyllite. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Problems,\nU.S. Bureau of Mines Bulletin 675, 1985.\nTalc. The Talc Industry—An Overview, U.S. Bureau of Mines\nInformation Circular 9220, 1989.\n1Prior to January 1996, published by the U.S. Bureau of Mines. TABLE 1\nSALIENT TALC AND PYROPHYLLITE STATISTICS 1/\n (Thousand metric tons, unless otherwise specified)\n1995 1996 1997 1998 1999\nUnited States:\n Mine production, crude:\n Talc 1,060 994 1,050 971r/ 925\n Pyrophyllite W W W W W\n Total 1,060 994 1,050 971r/ 925\n Value:\n Talc thousands $31,700 $31,100 $33,000 $27,300 r/$26,100\n Pyrophyllite do. W W W W W\n Total do. $31,700 $31,100 $33,000 $27,300 r/$26,100\n Sold by producers, crude and processed:\n Talc 901 909 942 870r/ 881\n Pyrophyllite W W W W W\n Total 901 909 942 870r/ 881\n Value:\n Talc thousands $99,900 $100,000 $111,000 $109,000 $102,000\n Pyrophyllite do. W W W W W\n Total do. $99,900 $100,000 $111,000 $109,000 $102,000\n Exports (talc) 2/ 183 192 179 146 147\n Value thousands $37,100 $37,900 $34,200 $26,000 $27,200\n Imports for consumption 146 187 123 165 208\n Value thousands $14,800 $20,500 $21,100 $23,300 $35,300\n Apparent consumption 3/ 1,020 989 992 1,080 986\nWorld, production 8,490r/ 9,880r/ 10,400 r/ 9,430r/ 9,470e/\ne/ Estimated. r/ Revised. W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data.\n1/ Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown.\n2/ Excludes powders--talcum (in package), face, and compact.\n3/ Production plus imports minus exports plus adjustments in Government and industry stock. Does not include pyrophyllite. \nTABLE 2\nCRUDE TALC PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES, BY STATE 1/ 2/\n(Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars)\n1998 r/ 1999\nState Quantity Value Quantity Value\nTexas 245 5,230 220 5,000\nOther 3/ 725 22,000 705 21,100\n Total 971 27,300 925 26,100\nr/ Revised.\n1/ Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown. \n2/ Excludes pyrophyllite.\n3/ Includes California, Montana, New York, Oregon, and Vermont. TABLE 3\nEND USES FOR GROUND TALC 1/\n(Thousand metric tons)\n1998 1999\nCeramics 212r/ 209\nCosmetics 32r/ 27\nInsecticides 10r/ 8\nPaint 135r/ 142\nPaper 160r/ 167\nPlastics 53r/ 64\nRefractories 5 2\nRoofing 55r/ 60\nRubber 23r/ 19\nOther 2/ 78r/ 73\n Total 764r/ 771\nr/ Revised.\n1/ Excludes pyrophyllite.\n2/ Includes art sculpture, asphalt filler, auto body filler, construction\ncaulks, flooring, joint compounds, and other uses not specified.\nTABLE 4\nPRICES OF TALC\n(U.S. dollars per metric ton)\nNew York:\n Paint:\n 200 mesh 100\n 400 mesh 180\n Ceramic:\n 200 mesh 83\n 325 mesh 92\nItalian, cosmetic-grade 288\nChinese, normal (ex-store):\n UK 200 mesh 321-363\n UK 350 mesh 338-371\nSource: Industrial Minerals, December 1999. TABLE 5\nU.S. EXPORTS OF TALC 1/ 2/\n(Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars)\n1998 1999\nCountry Quantity Value Quantity Value\nBelgium 15 1,960 14 1,780\nCanada 3/ 45 8,270 55 9,910\nJapan 61,000 71,250\nMexico 18 2,290 17 1,780\nOther 4/ 6112,500 5412,500\n Total 146 26,000 147 27,200\n1/ Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add\nto totals shown.\n2/ Excludes powders-talcum (in package), face, and compact.\n3/ Probably includes shipments in transit through Canadian ports.\n4/ Includes 62 countries in 1998 and 47 countries in 1999.\nSource: Bureau of the Census.\nTABLE 6\nU.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF TALC, BY COUNTRY 1/\nNot crushed or Crushed or Cut and Total\npowdered powdered sawed unmanufactured\n Quantity Value Quantity Value Quantity Value Quantity Value\n (metric (thou- (metric (thou- (metric (thou- (metric (thou-\n Country tons) sands) tons) sands) tons) sands) tons) sands)\n1998:\n Brazil 6 $6 114 $28 928 $824 1,050 $858\n Canada 19 8 29,700 6,640 84 108 29,800 6,750\n China 68,400 5,010 7,850 132 732 515 77,000 5,660\n France 6,060 656 28,000 313 5,670 5,700 39,700 6,670\n Japan -- -- 5,820 538 -- -- 5,820 538\n Other 2/ 10,200 894 1,450 402 519 1,520 12,200 2,820\n Total 84,700 6,580 72,900 8,050 7,930 8,660 165,000 23,300\n1999:\n Brazil 2 5 75 19 1,230 1,070 1,310 1,090\n Canada 89 37 44,100 11,400 6,220 4,980 50,400 16,500\n China 91,900 7,380 1,070 251 579 387 93,500 8,020\n France 175 235 21,300 384 5,060 5,180 26,600 5,800\n Japan -- -- 15,100 869 6 19 15,100 888\n Other 2/ 20,000 1,600 892 357 508 1,040 21,400 3,000\n Total 112,000 9,260 82,600 13,300 13,600 12,700 208,000 35,300\n-- Zero.\n1/ Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown.\n2/ Includes 26 countries in 1998 and 18 countries in 1999.\nSource: Bureau of the Census. TABLE 7\nTALC AND PYROPHYLLITE: WORLD PRODUCTION, BY COUNTRY AND PRODUCT 1/ 2/\n(Metric tons)\nCountry 3/ 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 e/\nArgentina:\n Pyrophyllite 4,189 2,180 2,242r/ 4,000r/ e/ 4,000\n Steatite e/ 300 300 300 300 300\n Talc 12,474 11,777 13,380 r/ 13,500 r/ 13,000\nAustralia: e/\n Pyrophyllite 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000\n Talc 210,000 210,000 210,000 210,000 210,000\nAustria: Steatite 131,614 130,000 e/ 155,730 156,000 e/ 150,000\nBrazil: Unspecified 4/ 450,684 452,180 452,000 e/ 452,000 e/ 452,000\nCanada: Pyrophyllite, soapstone, talc 116,000 77,000 73,000 r/ 78,000 r/ 79,000\nChile: Talc 4,107 4,276 3,986 3,772r/ 3,800\nChina: Unspecified e/ 2,400,000 4,000,000 r/4,100,000 r/3,800,000 r/3,900,000\nColombia: Pyrophyllite, soapstone, talc 19,248 14,800 e/ 14,832 15,000 r/ e/ 15,000\nEgypt: Pyrophyllite, soapstone, steatite, talc 38,608 r/ 41,227 r/ 43,627 r/ 39,720 r/ 40,000\nFinland: Talc 464,000 345,000 350,000 e/ 350,000 e/ 350,000\nFrance: Talc, crude 322,300 349,270 350,000 e/ 325,000 e/ 350,000\nGermany: Talc (marketable) 14,170 10,005 8,819 15,473 r/ 15,000\nGreece: Steatite e/ 500 -- -- -- --\nHungary: Talc e/ 1,150 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200\nIndia:\n Pyrophyllite 131,137 143,172 121,566 r/ 79,951 r/ 85,000\n Steatite 469,692 472,001 417,613 r/ 447,550 r/ 450,000\nIran: Talc e/ 5/ 20,000 r/ 20,000 r/ 20,000 r/ 20,000 r/ 20,000\nItaly: Steatite and talc e/ 136,000 168,000 142,000 140,000 140,000\nJapan:\n Pyrophyllite 947,713 913,973 913,822 764,079 r/ 750,000\n Talc 57,269 56,153 53,000 e/ 50,000 r/ e/ 50,000\nKorea, North: Unspecified e/ 180,000 180,000 180,000 150,000 120,000\nKorea, Republic of:\n Pyrophyllite 789,994 780,062 994,366 843,609 r/ 850,000\n Talc 29,364 19,066 25,751 24,411 r/ 25,000\nMacedonia: Talc e/ 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000\nMexico: Talc 11,134 10,100 r/ 13,586 18,843 r/ 20,000\nMorocco 8,429r/ 13,053 r/ 19,850 r/ 20,000 r/ 20,000\nNepal: Talc 6/ 1,500e/ 5,323 6,809 6,500e/ 6,500\nNorway: Talc e/ 30,000 30,000 30,000 28,000 26,000\nPakistan: Pyrophyllite 35,043 34,095 45,414 r/ 48,927 r/ 50,000\nParaguay: Unspecified e/ 200 200 200 200 200\nPeru: e/\n Pyrophyllite 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000\n Talc 13,818 7/ 12,985 7/ 13,000 13,000 13,000\nPortugal: Talc 8,400e/ 8,277 8,236r/ 8,400e/ 8,400\nRomania: Talc 9,976 10,248 7,578 8,000e/ 8,000\nRussia: Talc e/ 100,000 100,000 90,000 90,000 90,000\nSouth Africa:\n Pyrophyllite 5,519 2,140 2,129 2,532r/ 2,6067/\n Talc 9,173 16,397 24,400 r/ 21,900 r/ 18,249 7/\nSpain: Steatite 112,341 r/ 109,756 r/ 110,000 r/ e/ 110,000 r/ e/ 110,000\nSweden: Talc e/ 25,000 30,000 7/ 25,000 25,000 25,000\nTaiwan: Talc 3,500 1,500 1,331 73r/ 100\nThailand:\n Pyrophyllite 76,189 64,330 304,524 40,241 r/ 42,000\n Talc 4,252 7,238 7,139 1,972r/ 2,000\nTurkey e/ 4,000 4,000 4,000 5,000r/ 5,000\nUnited Kingdom: Talc, soapstone, pyrophyllite 4,298 5,322 5,500e/ 5,000e/ 5,000\nUnited States:\n Pyrophyllite W W W W W\n Talc 1,060,000 994,000 1,050,000 971,000 r/ 925,000 7/\nUruguay: Talc, soapstone, pyrophyllite 1,000e/ 898 1,133 972r/ 950\nZambia: Talc e/ 80 80 80 80 80\nSee footnotes at end of table. TABLE 7--Continued\nTALC AND PYROPHYLLITE: WORLD PRODUCTION, BY COUNTRY AND PRODUCT 1/ 2/\n(Metric tons)\nCountry 3/ 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 e/\nZimbabwe: Talc 2,080 1,076 1,023r/ 1,039r/ 1,000\n Grand total 8,490,000 r/9,880,000 r/10,400,000 r/9,430,000 r/9,470,000\n Of which:\n Pyrophyllite 2,000,000 1,950,000 2,390,000 r/1,790,000 r/1,790,000\n Steatite 714,000 712,000 r/ 684,000 r/ 714,000 r/ 710,000\n Talc 2,420,000 r/2,260,000 r/2,320,000 2,220,000 r/2,190,000\n Unspecified 3,360,000 r/4,960,000 r/5,040,000 r/4,710,000 r/4,780,000\ne/ Estimated. r/ Revised. W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data; not included in \"Total.\" -- Zero. \n1/ World totals, U.S. data, and estimated data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown.\n2/ Table includes data available through April 27, 2000.\n3/ In addition to the countries listed, the former Czechoslovakia produces talc, but information is inadequate to make reliable estimates of output levels.\n4/ As reported in the Sumário Mineral 1999-2000.\n5/ Data based on Iranian fiscal year beginning March 21 of year stated.\n6/ Data based on Nepalese fiscal year beginning mid-July of year stated.\n7/ Reported figure. " }

[ -0.08113183826208115, 0.04212585836648941, -0.07378681749105453, 0.009372528642416, 0.03955939784646034, -0.04763058200478554, 0.03459722921252251, 0.06627527624368668, -0.058187928050756454, -0.09498553723096848, -0.04315663501620293, -0.025562388822436333, 0.025937478989362717, 0.027668939903378487, -0.05941677466034889, -0.011171889491379261, 0.02757367119193077, -0.03037760965526104, -0.0019971237052232027, -0.009625962004065514, 0.046799007803201675, -0.020035577937960625, 0.006842482835054398, 0.05312696471810341, -0.03093232586979866, 0.0023327982053160667, -0.06704320013523102, -0.009128469042479992, -0.014151637442409992, -0.10453730821609497, -0.03442806005477905, 0.04143916815519333, -0.04258335754275322, -0.007662677206099033, 0.04638442397117615, -0.029388803988695145, -0.037160467356443405, 0.00909110065549612, 0.07939709722995758, 0.05197246000170708, 0.013377806171774864, -0.07868805527687073, 0.08619389683008194, -0.006109970156103373, -0.025829650461673737, -0.01142821554094553, -0.005240264348685741, -0.02893398329615593, -0.11805251985788345, -0.024222249165177345, 0.02966254949569702, -0.047414425760507584, -0.01694243587553501, 0.06379908323287964, -0.08035653084516525, -0.08019348233938217, -0.003575995098799467, -0.028073204681277275, 0.02784716710448265, -0.04188692569732666, 0.029570767655968666, 0.07566475123167038, 0.0013708036858588457, 0.04606494680047035, -0.07658497989177704, -0.02534138597548008, -0.0284577589482069, -0.03167303279042244, 0.042784493416547775, -0.02613387443125248, 0.040487658232450485, 0.04525455832481384, -0.009006304666399956, -0.030131421983242035, 0.02778768725693226, -0.009500859305262566, 0.036430053412914276, 0.013960722833871841, 0.03965376690030098, -0.026535075157880783, 0.08064311742782593, -0.02717668004333973, 0.0186464823782444, -0.04568394646048546, 0.011297839693725109, -0.024208737537264824, -0.058577995747327805, 0.047108083963394165, 0.01861581765115261, -0.07261458039283752, 0.03750624507665634, 0.08860588073730469, -0.023287856951355934, 0.07279402762651443, 0.08937346190214157, 0.003720903303474188, 0.06080017238855362, 0.0356547087430954, -0.026939284056425095, -0.0071676247753202915, 0.0899517610669136, 0.037705857306718826, 0.011277386918663979, 0.04307305067777634, 0.00514554837718606, -0.02985413186252117, 0.024848364293575287, 0.03898176550865173, 0.010447217151522636, -0.09093258529901505, -0.00009201629291055724, 0.022899100556969643, 0.014762735925614834, -0.0906657725572586, -0.05945674702525139, 0.031483814120292664, -0.08993744850158691, 0.019861597567796707, -0.030741387978196144, -0.033117540180683136, -0.006776007823646069, -0.049484435468912125, -0.06651996076107025, 0.019494635984301567, 0.11116443574428558, 0.10756197571754456, -0.06747783720493317, 1.0431274421059592e-32, 0.013863781467080116, 0.005095053464174271, -0.06972240656614304, 0.018920697271823883, -0.07867467403411865, 0.04632730409502983, -0.03449366241693497, 0.0001319685543421656, -0.05356308072805405, 0.058346834033727646, -0.053084783256053925, 0.08155561238527298, -0.054524976760149, 0.029618414118885994, 0.048962656408548355, -0.060146789997816086, -0.02302299253642559, 0.03010069951415062, -0.05793535336852074, -0.044012170284986496, -0.012509980238974094, -0.05058334022760391, -0.0006002335576340556, -0.01907484419643879, 0.06873468309640884, 0.10786112397909164, 0.08145596086978912, -0.034791912883520126, -0.09759742766618729, 0.048709481954574585, 0.0224909670650959, 0.04364747926592827, -0.017635568976402283, 0.055002134293317795, -0.007510592695325613, -0.08423052728176117, -0.12827199697494507, -0.018794391304254532, -0.07371851801872253, -0.06588206440210342, 0.021362770348787308, 0.12542280554771423, -0.038755953311920166, -0.06124439835548401, 0.03762300685048103, -0.0019255878869444132, -0.028356606140732765, 0.041020896285772324, 0.08129216730594635, -0.02652423083782196, -0.009437542408704758, 0.023787062615156174, -0.10993635654449463, 0.022972218692302704, 0.07469303905963898, 0.07198233157396317, 0.035762205719947815, 0.031791891902685165, 0.028466179966926575, 0.014861613512039185, -0.025852473452687263, 0.08899324387311935, 0.05661635845899582, 0.025039296597242355, 0.038457419723272324, 0.07405827939510345, 0.030648743733763695, 0.0032441115472465754, 0.04697101563215256, -0.017723487690091133, -0.004901210777461529, -0.05635504424571991, 0.08910532295703888, -0.028590716421604156, 0.06583312153816223, -0.029339797794818878, -0.012218944728374481, -0.003873285138979554, -0.03395182639360428, -0.049883369356393814, -0.08337143808603287, -0.06984686851501465, 0.06995993107557297, 0.03747944161295891, -0.037220630794763565, -0.051388710737228394, -0.0021452351938933134, 0.044393084943294525, -0.022082684561610222, 0.0052558970637619495, -0.05343840643763542, -0.04703671112656593, 0.02951250970363617, -0.0246511809527874, -0.06117774918675423, -7.733509743134657e-33, 0.04246637597680092, 0.04480067268013954, -0.02982911840081215, -0.024279547855257988, -0.045638307929039, -0.06987766921520233, 0.03424554318189621, -0.006930266506969929, 0.07286249101161957, 0.029874321073293686, -0.03243592008948326, 0.06526212394237518, 0.01554163172841072, -0.010881323367357254, 0.04723910614848137, 0.012037156149744987, 0.05183978006243706, -0.11111138761043549, -0.012308111414313316, -0.022923877462744713, 0.03761010989546776, -0.03920447453856468, -0.1516905575990677, 0.042484164237976074, -0.0434238500893116, 0.06259968131780624, 0.012269528582692146, -0.03789684548974037, 0.03387030214071274, -0.08686063438653946, -0.07830929756164551, -0.015586495399475098, 0.03212248533964157, 0.01306111365556717, -0.05090466886758804, -0.039205897599458694, 0.09441399574279785, 0.03746030107140541, -0.012718523852527142, -0.030963866040110588, 0.00367150641977787, 0.019077012315392494, -0.033457934856414795, -0.011334958486258984, 0.018409904092550278, -0.014466535300016403, 0.06507997959852219, -0.07685186713933945, 0.032940447330474854, -0.020167022943496704, -0.07329940795898438, -0.06669910997152328, -0.0719403326511383, 0.016738150268793106, 0.0017323107458651066, -0.012986025772988796, -0.011165888980031013, 0.09178565442562103, -0.11464903503656387, -0.07045618444681168, 0.09010513126850128, 0.05744131654500961, 0.01677905023097992, 0.014037730172276497, -0.07661964744329453, -0.012045243754982948, -0.019772017374634743, -0.008962340652942657, 0.03327035531401634, 0.08549336344003677, 0.09664744883775711, 0.044883303344249725, -0.0264444462954998, 0.005955800414085388, -0.010418245568871498, -0.002184869721531868, -0.00638214685022831, -0.0316496379673481, 0.054510556161403656, -0.03663703799247742, -0.0285326037555933, -0.04282180964946747, -0.002258813474327326, 0.03000236488878727, 0.07246137410402298, -0.03565818816423416, -0.0023387062828987837, -0.04964308813214302, 0.08230596780776978, -0.019748492166399956, 0.015715625137090683, -0.004650437738746405, -0.04098721221089363, 0.0037043550983071327, 0.04767483472824097, -5.0925208938679134e-8, -0.008222566917538643, 0.07326244562864304, -0.08001620322465897, 0.07500586658716202, -0.0192259568721056, -0.06990662962198257, 0.04596249386668205, 0.14157018065452576, -0.03958999738097191, -0.030560854822397232, 0.056839995086193085, -0.038300663232803345, 0.053674325346946716, -0.06109673157334328, 0.054288942366838455, -0.034937240183353424, -0.06454820930957794, -0.011923432350158691, -0.020740317180752754, 0.05437829717993736, 0.08169623464345932, 0.031543996185064316, -0.0034239671658724546, -0.06121143698692322, -0.02636449597775936, 0.016829198226332664, 0.01830371282994747, -0.02854485623538494, 0.10163013637065887, -0.02906007319688797, 0.02010236121714115, -0.0040949443355202675, 0.04713686183094978, -0.058270279318094254, 0.14816729724407196, 0.0979607105255127, -0.05937478318810463, -0.03369668498635292, 0.10989104956388474, 0.009271552786231041, 0.006792583502829075, -0.055818863213062286, 0.0014922275440767407, 0.013785943388938904, -0.007868703454732895, 0.046113450080156326, -0.058382466435432434, -0.08702366799116135, 0.02314094267785549, 0.0629941076040268, 0.03111283667385578, -0.0733519122004509, -0.03504980355501175, 0.028204092755913734, 0.07213111221790314, 0.06599799543619156, 0.01456752885133028, -0.012688814662396908, 0.04661843925714493, 0.015367865562438965, 0.0037260924000293016, 0.0000014911049674992682, -0.08852201700210571, -0.002571245189756155 ]

{ "pdf_file": "MMSNF4WV7XLHQFKEQYKHHH7GJPPQJQ7U.pdf", "text": "LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 1Liquid Argon TPC R&D Update\n(a Fermilab perspective)\n• Massive LAr Detector Paradigms\n• Technical Efforts at Fermilab LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 2Massive Detector Paradigms\n• Liquefied Natural Gas tank (FLARE-like)\n– Single large volume with multiple horizontal drift \nregions\n• Liquefied Natural Gas tank (GLACIER-like)\n– Single large volume with single vertical drift region \nfollowed by multiplication in the gas\n• Modules (ICARUS-like)\n– Many (perhaps identical) detectors of the largest \npractical “modest” size with horizontal drift regions LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 3\nMany large LNG tanks in \nservice. excellent safety recordDetector Tank based on Industrial Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) storage tanks LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 4SECTION B-BLiquid Argon ACTIVEFLARE Design: View from the Top of 50kton LArTPC\nDRIFT SPACECathode planes\nWires planes\nLiquid Argon:\nTotal-59,000 tons\nActive-47,500 tons\nNote: 47.5 / 59.0 = 0.805 LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 5\n LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 6\nC. Rubbia at Fermilab October 2005 “20 years of liquid Argon technology” LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 7Some uses of Massive LAr Detectors\n• One use (of particular interest at Fermilab):\n– An excellent electron neutrino detector in a neutrino beam\n– Although the neutrino beam itself may only be ~10 \nmicroseconds long, the electrons will take ~2 milliseconds to \ndrift to the TPC sense wires\n– If it can be demonstrated that the cosmic ray background \ncan be handled it may be sensible to locate the detector near \nthe surface (under a few meters of overburden).\n• Another use:\n– A detector under (at least ~50 meters of) dirt/rock cover to \nreduce cosmic ray background\n– This allows for nucleon decay, supernovae neutrino watches …\nand it can still be put in a neutrino beam. LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 8Some Features of Massive LAr Detectors\n• Features of modular approach:\n– It avoids various problems with large dimension objects\n– It does not “put all your eggs in one basket”– It allows for a staged turn on of data taking\n• Light collection is another feature\n– Provides a trigger for natural processes such as nucleon \ndecay and supernovae … and is very useful for sorting out \nbackground tracks in dete ctors in neutrino beams\n• Feature of long drift: Purity\n– ICARUS has shown it can be done on 300ton scale\n– Now it must be done better to be useful for massive scale LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 9• Massive LAr Detector Paradigms\n• Technical Efforts at Fermilab\n–O v e r v i e w\n– Purity Monitors\n– Materials Test Station\n– Argon Piston\n– Purity Demonstration\n– Cellular Design of the TPCLiquid Argon TPC R&D Update\n(a Fermilab perspective) LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 10Overview: 1\n• Focus of technical effort Fermilab: “Big Tank” issues\n–T h i s T a l k\n•U s i n g Fermilab’s neutrino beams :\n– Proposal to put a ~300liter TPC in front of the MINOS near \ndetector (T962) by Yale, Michigan State University and Fermilab\n– Conceptual development of a 150ton neutrino detector on the \nsurface almost directly above the MINOS near detector.\n• Long Baseline study with Brookhaven\n–L A r T P C physics case studies include using off-axis NuMI beam as \nwell as on-axis beam to DUSEL (off-axis = narrow band, on-axis = \nbroad band)\n• Specific recent study\n– Understand the physics reach of a 5kton LArTPC detector near the \nlocation of NOvA .\n• We continue to trade ideas with other groups around the world. LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 11• Commissioning of the Materials Test Station \n– qualify / disqualify materials to be used in a detector\n•Purity demonstration without evacuation\n– Demonstrate that the purity required by a large liquid argon TPC \ndetector can be achieved withou t evacuation, and estimate the \nassociated costs for a 5kton scale detector or larger\n– A key is to use argon as a “piston” to push out the air as an \ninexpensive first step (e.g., remove ~ton of oxygen in a 5kton tank)\n•Cellular TPC design\n– The presently preferred TPC design at Fermilab for the 5kton \ndetector is the Cellular Design.\n• Systems integration test in a ~30liter TPC (not in this talk)\n– Observe cosmic ray tracks\n–Develop electronics needed for T962 and other detectors (MSU)\n•Purity monitors\n– Will make more as needed for the purity demonstration without \nevacuation and other uses.Overview : 2 LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 12More Purity Monitors\n50 cm\nICARUS Clone made at FermilabLong Purity Monitor - for long drift life times LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 13Electron lifetime measurement in LAr\na 2.8 millisecond drift, Qanode/Qcathode ~ 0.4(*)\n(*) peaks need some correction for cathode signal rise-timeanode signal\ncathode signal\n• Our first measurement May 4, 2006 surpassed the 10 msec lifetime \nrequired for a 3m drift with a 20% loss for a 500 V/cm field. LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 14• Massive LAr Detector Paradigms\n• Technical Progress at Fermilab\n–O v e r v i e w\n– Purity Monitors\n– Materials Test Station\n– Argon Piston\n– Purity Demonstration\n– Cellular Design of the TPCLiquid Argon TPC R&D Update\n(a Fermilab perspective) LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 15Implement the Materials Test Station..\n- Closed system cryostat - sketch at right\nIt is fully assembled and awaiting safety \nreview.\nNote Materials lock which allows \nintroduction of materials without evacuating\nStart debugging the system in March 2007Developing in-cryostat filtering\n(new development)\nStart testing materials by the summer of \n2007 … if all continues to go well.\nMaterials lockLAr boil-off condenser\nLN2\nGas contaminant\nPrM\nT. TopeMaterials Test Station LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 16\nInsulating \nVacuumArgon \nVacuumInternal\nFilter &Pump\nSample\nCagePurity\nMonitorHydrogen for\nRegeneration\nC. Kendziora\n01_30_07Materials Test Station LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 17Materials Test Station\nStay tuned … and feel free to suggest materials to be tested\n LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 18• Massive LAr Detector Paradigms\n• Technical Progress at Fermilab etc\n–O v e r v i e w\n– Purity Monitors\n– Materials Test Station\n– Argon Piston\n– Purity Demonstration\n– Cellular Design of the TPCLiquid Argon TPC R&D Update\n(a Fermilab perspective) LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 19Test of purgi ng a volume f rom atmosphere (without evacuation):\nInsert Argon gas at bo ttom of tank over large area at low velocity.\nThe Argon introduced, being he avier than air, will act as a piston and drive the air out of the tank at the top. \nFewer volume changes than simple mixing requires will achieve a given reduction in air concentration.\ntank volume = 157 cf\ntank cross section = 19 sfflow rate ~ 73.2 cf/h\n(reading for ai r was 86 scfh)\nclimb rate ~ 3.8 f/h\ndiffuser\nargon gas inWASHED\nTANKgas out\n99 ins\n59 ins`O2 Monitor'`O2 Monitor'to PPM Monitor \n(parts per milli on of oxygen)\n24 ins48 insUsing an “Argon Piston” to Purge oxygen\n(reported at Gran Sasso Cryodet Workshop March 2006)\nbubbler LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 20\nThe Test \nTank …\n… behind an \naverage \nsized \nFermilab\nengineer.\n(The very small \ntank to his right is \na “bubbler”.)Using an “Argon Piston” to Purge oxygen LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 21Oxygen Content vs Time\n0510152025\n17:16 18:16 19:16 20:16 21:16 22:16 23:16 0:16 1:17 2:17 3:17\nTimeOxygen Content (%)\n04080120160200\nOxygen PPMUpper Monitor\nLower Monitor\nPPM Monitor\n5000 ppm\noutput\n100 ppm\noutput\nto 100 ppm (reduction of 2,000) ta kes 6 hrs = 2.6 volume changes\n(cf simple mixing, which predicts ln(2000) = 7.6 vo lume changes)Measurements using an “Argon Piston” to Purge oxygen\n(reported at Gran Sasso Cryodet Workshop March 2006) LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 22\nArgon Piston: Add Instrumentation LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 23\nNitrogen is expected to \nexhibit perfect mixing and it does.Argon Piston compared with Nitrogen LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 24Purity Demonstration: 1\n• Demonstrate that the purity requ ired by a large liquid argon TPC\ndetector can be achieved without evacuation , and estimate the \nassociated costs.\n• A credible demonstration must use, as much as possible, the same \nmaterials and techniques as expected to be used for a massive detector \n(e.g., 5kton). Thus, the design of the detector must be sufficiently \nunderstood.\n• The purity demonstration itself does not need a functioning TPC,\nbut it does need to include the TPC materials arranged as in an \nexperiment, and prepared in the same manner as in an \nexperiment.\n• The present focus is to propose using a 150ton LNG tank\nconstructed by an LNG contractor.\n– 150tons is scaled down from 5ktons by a factor of 30\n– appropriately modified to accommodate a TPC– appropriately cleaned– use appropriately clean techniques to insert the cellular design TPC LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 25Purity Demonstration: 2\n• Three steps starting from air in the tank:\n– Warm argon gas used as a piston\n• purge oxygen to 50ppm or less\n• vertical velocity chosen to control diffusion and to be the same as to \nbe used in a 5kton detector\n– Recirculation of warm argon gas\n• recirculated through filter scaled down from 5kton\n• remove water and oxygen, goal is 500ppb• i. e., achieve purity similar to that achieved by ICARUS with \nevacuation\n–L i q u i d p u r i f i c a t i o n system similar to ICARUS\n• Final purity expected to be determined by contaminants from tank\nwalls, TPC materials, flow restrictions due to presence of TPC, \nleaks, etc. LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 26• Massive LAr Detector Paradigms\n• Technical Progress at Fermilab etc\n–O v e r v i e w\n– Purity Monitors\n– Materials Test Station\n– Argon Piston\n– Purity Demonstration\n– Cellular Design of the TPCLiquid Argon TPC R&D Update\n(a Fermilab perspective) LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 27Previous Design: LArTPC 50kton (wire plane section)\nCHIMNEY SPACE\nCHIMNEY\nDeck \nsupported from the domeA\nBA\nLiquid Argon TOTALBWires in plane\n(+20º,-20º, 0º)SUPPORT TUBE DOME WARM DECK LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 28Cellular Design: An Alternate Wire Layout\n(A Better Idea, perhaps)\nIn the previous design with angled wires, attached to the tank top, \nbottom, and sides, there will be so me wires that do not reach all the \nway to the top. Hence they cannot easily be read out (without \nelectronics immersed in the liquid, for example).\nEach set of wire planes has 3 planes to detect electrons drifting in from \nthe left, and 3 planes for electrons drifting in from the right.\nFor each plane in the left triplet, there is a corresponding plane, with \nthe same DC potential, in the right triplet.\nWhy not …\nConnect the short wires on the left, that did not reach the top, to the set of short wires on the right that start not at the tank bottom, but \nhigher up on the wall.\nVoila: \nComplete coverage . LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 29“Complete Coverage” Conceptual Layout\n+”α”l a y o u t\n-”α”l a y o u t\nVertical layoutGround layout\nDriftDrift\n}“Half” wire\nlayout\nWe can cover \nthe full chamber \narea …\nwhile bringing \nall signals out \nat the top \nsurface. LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 30View from the Top: Complete Coverage Layout\n+”α”l a y o u t\n-”α”l a y o u t\nVertical layoutGround layout Drift\nDrift}“Half” wire\nlayout\nCold Tank WallCold Tank Wall\n LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 31Cellular TPC\nInterpret the previous cross sect ion as that of a panel that \nforms a “cell” just 3 m wide.\nThe panel is tall enough to re ach the top of the Argon pool.\nSince a single wire wraps around the cell from the left side to \nright side, this introduces pa ttern recognition complications.\nWhat do we gain ?\n1. Panels are made off-site an d shipped (by truck or cargo \nplane) to the detector site\n2. Panels are made while the tank is being built3. Panels are fully tested and cold-shocked4. Panel installation is fast and low-risk LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 32\nCellular TPC, Top View LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 33Some Web References for this talk\n• Web site with many of the items in this talk\n–http://www-lartpc.fnal.gov/\n–http://lartpc-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/DocumentDatabase\n• Cryodet workshop\n–http://cryodet.lngs.infn.it/agenda/agenda.htm\n•Y a l e W o r k s h o p\n–http://www-lartpc.fnal.gov/atwork/workandconf/2006workshop/\n• Draft Long Baseline report (not the final version)\n–http://nwg.phy.bnl.gov/fnal-bnl/ LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 34•Thank you! LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 35Backup LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 36\nLiquid Argon Purity Monitor\n~ 20 cm from anode \nto cathode.\nBased on ICARUS \ndesign.\nUsed to measure \nelectron “lifetime”.\nFlash of light strikes \nphotocathodeElectrons arrive at anode LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 37\nBetter View of Argon and Nitrogen purging LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 38Liquid Argon TPC Overview for NuSAG\nNote: At this point \nin time …\n“15” could be “50”\n“1” could be “3”\netcThe optimum \nchoices depend on \nthe goals.Submitted to NuSAG by \nthe LArTPC group\nSummer 2005The “LArTPC group” is \nFermilab plus 6 \nuniversities LaThuile Italy / David Finley , Fermilab / March 2007 Slide 39A 5 ton detector is a cylinder 5 meters high with diameter 1 meter. \nA 150 ton detector is a cylinder 5 me ters high with diameter 5 meters.\nA 5 kton detector is a cylinder 17 meters high with diameter 17 meters\nThe transverse dimension is partly modular - more panels, similar drift distances; \nIf the 150 ton detector works, the des ign of the 17 meter panel is probably \nthe key technical challenge.1 meter\nwire panelField grid\nwire panelsField grid5 meters 17 meters\nField gridLiquid Argon Technical Agenda - Scaling up" }

[ -0.060850292444229126, 0.006327591836452484, 0.001083388808183372, -0.04879346489906311, 0.06235961988568306, 0.12593303620815277, -0.011971786618232727, 0.03110414184629917, -0.02565888501703739, 0.04924585297703743, -0.024898558855056763, 0.018438374623656273, -0.004752694629132748, 0.03790627419948578, 0.07692260295152664, -0.017494751140475273, 0.018103884533047676, 0.052297960966825485, 0.0011857426725327969, 0.008755644783377647, 0.005124710034579039, 0.05672499164938927, -0.11130688339471817, 0.03416464477777481, 0.07266151905059814, -0.008910579606890678, -0.059099577367305756, -0.009173239581286907, -0.07534094154834747, 0.008153646253049374, -0.007867133244872093, -0.02470998838543892, -0.00999378226697445, 0.09591499716043472, 0.03084602952003479, -0.03630877286195755, -0.052568815648555756, 0.0029876085463911295, -0.04101705923676491, -0.06255427747964859, -0.0070883287116885185, -0.04613921046257019, -0.017396673560142517, -0.04712606221437454, -0.053747184574604034, 0.10330945253372192, 0.01882578618824482, -0.013197006657719612, -0.10595543682575226, 0.048581138253211975, 0.057187825441360474, -0.011631323955953121, 0.01291435956954956, 0.010892678052186966, 0.010616841726005077, 0.0640065148472786, 0.005516079720109701, -0.032511256635189056, -0.025812329724431038, 0.07916611433029175, -0.03832602873444557, -0.04158562794327736, -0.006269435863941908, 0.019482845440506935, 0.04692267253994942, -0.04104752466082573, 0.11628390848636627, -0.04496196657419205, 0.0054071866907179356, -0.07937633991241455, -0.0023887597490102053, -0.0630742609500885, -0.012689154595136642, -0.08881942927837372, 0.09908052533864975, 0.1345355063676834, 0.019563637673854828, 0.053523335605859756, 0.07768217474222183, -0.06734448671340942, -0.006197645794600248, 0.07715311646461487, -0.02166450023651123, 0.00943270418792963, -0.02169371023774147, 0.013800718821585178, -0.0015365226427093148, 0.018566304817795753, -0.03323134034872055, -0.04482364282011986, 0.056113142520189285, -0.06279313564300537, 0.086644746363163, -0.015549217350780964, -0.003409875323995948, 0.02036343701183796, -0.07941047847270966, -0.021471891552209854, -0.03187102824449539, -0.01887468434870243, -0.008182588964700699, -0.06541100889444351, 0.009882836602628231, -0.061805304139852524, -0.013717948459088802, -0.08608733862638474, 0.03467468544840813, 0.024904511868953705, -0.04838212579488754, -0.0747203528881073, 0.008843234740197659, 0.010616544634103775, 0.0037178141064941883, -0.030412456020712852, -0.002012308221310377, 0.05957070365548134, -0.00021475425455719233, 0.011621139943599701, 0.06941451132297516, 0.028584478422999382, 0.05338774248957634, 0.042727526277303696, -0.02332991734147072, 0.0011393559398129582, -0.11682690680027008, 0.044511035084724426, -0.02803758531808853, 4.0437898309309346e-33, 0.010082259774208069, 0.03131234645843506, 0.01267458125948906, -0.05101480707526207, -0.0005390141159296036, -0.08228502422571182, 0.02913641184568405, 0.009789559058845043, 0.1116177961230278, 0.026006527245044708, -0.05587953329086304, 0.04591292515397072, 0.012992849573493004, 0.002379553858190775, -0.02204875461757183, -0.029717670753598213, -0.01581016555428505, 0.03729480877518654, 0.060288671404123306, 0.07857689261436462, 0.03460559993982315, 0.049149855971336365, 0.013368128798902035, 0.061378564685583115, -0.024325719103217125, -0.0034306435845792294, -0.1112080067396164, -0.06307902932167053, -0.08847387135028839, -0.009694532491266727, -0.038310129195451736, 0.10993927717208862, 0.03768875077366829, -0.014255302958190441, -0.05593114718794823, 0.007578702177852392, 0.04058895632624626, -0.040715549141168594, -0.04789372533559799, -0.061376966536045074, -0.009305188432335854, 0.0420287549495697, -0.001341783907264471, -0.05020541697740555, 0.08424479514360428, -0.008685900829732418, 0.01313762553036213, -0.057529959827661514, 0.023133400827646255, 0.009052533656358719, 0.027774516493082047, 0.016561359167099, 0.06156094744801521, -0.11628472805023193, -0.026813646778464317, -0.013520395383238792, 0.031864240765571594, -0.04463259130716324, 0.019246049225330353, -0.04671201854944229, -0.0354616716504097, -0.0970684140920639, -0.024020707234740257, -0.060811497271060944, -0.08399513363838196, 0.08459260314702988, 0.038136258721351624, -0.01781180128455162, 0.027917150408029556, -0.007848329842090607, -0.019025417044758797, 0.053853075951337814, -0.04172496125102043, -0.04388340190052986, -0.015395207330584526, -0.025503186509013176, 0.039432816207408905, 0.0048669870011508465, -0.030666686594486237, 0.016879858449101448, 0.10525370389223099, 0.16458912193775177, 0.14611288905143738, -0.05301520600914955, 0.17822034657001495, -0.013788273558020592, 0.004178795497864485, 0.023587852716445923, 0.07092926651239395, -0.05037236586213112, 0.08432277292013168, -0.02034495212137699, 0.06127157062292099, 0.1068667322397232, 0.03486818075180054, -3.460400066141495e-33, -0.021072426810860634, 0.03476500138640404, -0.09615261852741241, -0.03644156455993652, 0.020744528621435165, -0.014944875612854958, 0.040622372180223465, -0.010764453560113907, -0.024058425799012184, -0.06314603984355927, -0.0014527400489896536, -0.04309748858213425, 0.007516616024076939, 0.0004492405569180846, -0.028321029618382454, -0.0613861158490181, -0.05223997309803963, -0.09681033343076706, -0.02082294411957264, 0.024633539840579033, 0.09599877148866653, 0.03196578845381737, -0.04284009337425232, -0.00931035540997982, 0.0308454018086195, 0.010373526252806187, -0.07634112238883972, 0.009430869482457638, 0.08441080152988434, 0.007254065480083227, -0.035044170916080475, -0.06008278205990791, -0.0458686389029026, 0.01712237484753132, 0.050838619470596313, -0.11622354388237, -0.04880036786198616, 0.04130226746201515, -0.04917999729514122, 0.09225554764270782, -0.004077858757227659, -0.0332176648080349, 0.033472102135419846, 0.020158104598522186, 0.06395763903856277, -0.010320684872567654, 0.07455690950155258, -0.041543859988451004, -0.02396843023598194, 0.007168863900005817, 0.061806026846170425, -0.08127716183662415, 0.007284597493708134, -0.011869549751281738, 0.0170575138181448, -0.005065447185188532, 0.05118094012141228, -0.0704248771071434, 0.01547012384980917, -0.05848974734544754, 0.0034318123944103718, 0.01863410882651806, -0.0072644902393221855, -0.0005141121218912303, 0.0036025112494826317, -0.004214847926050425, -0.0007690174970775843, -0.062356457114219666, -0.058537792414426804, 0.01700686663389206, -0.01832198165357113, -0.08292832970619202, -0.016460731625556946, -0.066671222448349, -0.005564210470765829, 0.014511540532112122, -0.013845317997038364, 0.008349139243364334, -0.0860595703125, 0.06339506804943085, -0.08582579344511032, -0.008561576716601849, 0.009159053675830364, 0.02453264221549034, 0.07164311408996582, 0.04914158582687378, 0.027025852352380753, -0.02148561179637909, 0.008754937909543514, 0.014221237041056156, -0.09682479500770569, -0.031435903161764145, 0.004253721330314875, 0.052607227116823196, -0.0008674803539179265, -5.551259008029774e-8, 0.057725630700588226, 0.0988728255033493, -0.09611319750547409, 0.002815471263602376, 0.051080647855997086, -0.04055115953087807, 0.02294694259762764, -0.043946508318185806, 0.09376555681228638, 0.08373204618692398, 0.007697499357163906, 0.010930298827588558, 0.030879825353622437, -0.029798611998558044, 0.03571141138672829, 0.07783631980419159, -0.024947108700871468, 0.029667003080248833, 0.0032682749442756176, -0.025493666529655457, -0.08774781972169876, 0.028827346861362457, -0.0202868040651083, -0.05153174698352814, -0.053377434611320496, 0.035699889063835144, -0.044707316905260086, 0.08336617052555084, 0.09437049925327301, 0.07696101069450378, -0.07108046114444733, 0.030241550877690315, 0.026075739413499832, -0.05854072794318199, -0.017020361497998238, 0.014692663215100765, 0.0449773445725441, 0.04831117391586304, -0.015796884894371033, 0.021690892055630684, 0.0843718945980072, 0.092631496489048, -0.03552226722240448, 0.0483119860291481, 0.018358832225203514, -0.03899139165878296, -0.07010997086763382, -0.01823178492486477, -0.020305100828409195, -0.03538299351930618, 0.040791019797325134, 0.013843899592757225, -0.03925483301281929, 0.014334658160805702, 0.021917564794421196, -0.07090169191360474, 0.04012702405452728, -0.1002856120467186, -0.048201143741607666, -0.0062278020195662975, -0.019243523478507996, -0.04952693358063698, -0.02606489509344101, 0.041012827306985855 ]

{ "pdf_file": "32PQ6TLRU26TDGA4NLYBMYEHYGX3X7US.pdf", "text": "October 27, 1999\nCore compensation has generated a lot of myths. Here are the 3 myths we've been hearing\nthe most, along with the FACTS.\nMYTH #1:\nThe Core Compensation Plan is going to be put in place sooner than April 2000.\nFACT:\nThere are no plans to convert to the Core before April 2000. The FAA plans to convert on\nApril 23, 2000.\nMYTH #2:\nEmployees in bargaining units will never be covered by the Core Compensation Plan.\nFACT:\nThe Core Compensation Plan will be the basis for all future management bargaining\nproposals for all bargaining units. However, bargaining unit members will not be converted\nto the Core Plan until an agreement is reached between their union and the agency.\nMYTH #3:\nThe agency is planning to remove or reduce important employee benefits (such as, sick\nand annual leave, leave transfer program, overtime pay, alternate work schedules, holidays,\njury duty or witness service, RIF protections, and/or military leave).\nFACT:\nThe FAA is not planning to remove or reduce any of these benefits. When FAA was\noriginally exempted from Title V, it had the opportunity to change these benefits because it\nwas no longer required by law to maintain them. The agency chose to maintain these\nimportant benefits and has no plans to remove or reduce them.\nNeed more Info?\nThere are other myths out there, and a lot of questions. To find additional information, check the\nInternet site, http://www.faa.gov/corecomp/ . Frequently asked questions and their answers are at\nhttp://www.faa.gov/corecomp/qanda.htm." }

[ -0.03445914015173912, -0.0025971124414354563, 0.016188297420740128, 0.007465525064617395, -0.020900970324873924, 0.027338577434420586, -0.060957808047533035, 0.03210359066724777, -0.04438784718513489, 0.04361476004123688, 0.09350796788930893, -0.0645003542304039, -0.01666748709976673, 0.006501908414065838, -0.05442511662840843, 0.047285888344049454, 0.05012927204370499, 0.0023395230527967215, -0.012458698824048042, -0.04274144023656845, -0.027749624103307724, 0.04392840713262558, -0.01024835929274559, 0.01235075481235981, -0.009447298012673855, 0.05373382940888405, 0.010345243848860264, -0.08070148527622223, -0.06247638165950775, -0.02037915587425232, 0.02566821314394474, -0.05176717787981033, 0.016477886587381363, 0.05347006395459175, 0.03295981138944626, 0.010423632338643074, 0.08331754803657532, 0.041294850409030914, 0.021168215200304985, 0.04018111899495125, -0.1047319769859314, -0.036501482129096985, 0.01900419220328331, -0.003586781909689307, -0.04132296144962311, 0.00342876510694623, -0.061715733259916306, -0.01702253893017769, -0.08352715522050858, -0.03594500944018364, -0.0013121027732267976, -0.040218330919742584, 0.026460658758878708, 0.03128950670361519, -0.05119314417243004, 0.06877913326025009, 0.032555270940065384, -0.07774785906076431, -0.07283817231655121, 0.028129907324910164, -0.09034426510334015, -0.001193540869280696, -0.025254568085074425, 0.016358524560928345, 0.010682130232453346, 0.08016961812973022, -0.010850478895008564, -0.06448720395565033, 0.025643987581133842, 0.0011127685429528356, 0.0034828162752091885, 0.03578215837478638, 0.0017363184597343206, -0.01184180285781622, 0.07261740416288376, 0.05996110662817955, -0.0017497536027804017, 0.06312981247901917, 0.1373433619737625, -0.0944666862487793, -0.031109126284718513, 0.012785281985998154, -0.02392861247062683, -0.03534621000289917, 0.04864748567342758, -0.024775641039013863, 0.04491742327809334, 0.019043058156967163, -0.0172346830368042, 0.033594634383916855, 0.08666418492794037, 0.09184996783733368, -0.04231535643339157, 0.05583254247903824, 0.02403487078845501, -0.03562683239579201, 0.03413794934749603, 0.006110439542680979, 0.007542888168245554, -0.009785594418644905, -0.044403523206710815, 0.030920343473553658, -0.024231411516666412, -0.00506729306653142, -0.08773299306631088, -0.10976023226976395, 0.14729398488998413, -0.08085984736680984, -0.04739851877093315, -0.03721072897315025, 0.036106742918491364, -0.07797911763191223, -0.004216936882585287, 0.02543805167078972, 0.01131699699908495, -0.09037932753562927, 0.022142061963677406, 0.08623448014259338, 0.008617296814918518, 0.017245223745703697, -0.0164381954818964, 0.16418874263763428, 0.007939614355564117, -0.020201118662953377, -0.020803799852728844, 0.01518428698182106, -0.05982496961951256, 8.340574698833627e-33, 0.03290589526295662, 0.008668806403875351, -0.0480753518640995, 0.016971182078123093, -0.09068956971168518, 0.0036276979371905327, -0.020167063921689987, 0.03549269214272499, 0.03125457465648651, -0.04047011956572533, -0.040384676307439804, -0.07741869986057281, -0.02330944314599037, -0.006400418002158403, 0.08317483961582184, 0.06083682179450989, -0.05983258783817291, -0.008892139419913292, -0.1180853545665741, 0.07283125072717667, 0.04461786523461342, -0.054675012826919556, -0.01745278760790825, -0.007831485942006111, -0.052771542221307755, 0.02327328734099865, 0.011864612810313702, 0.07858830690383911, -0.046728044748306274, 0.01737365499138832, 0.06287922710180283, -0.02041652612388134, -0.05369521677494049, -0.044183988124132156, 0.053934741765260696, -0.041509710252285004, 0.08750282227993011, 0.05235684663057327, 0.020054321736097336, 0.0033027802128344774, -0.01271039992570877, 0.03211408108472824, 0.0693911761045456, -0.06678721308708191, 0.018469009548425674, -0.0179036445915699, 0.004058966413140297, 0.03749774023890495, 0.05591128021478653, 0.05837410315871239, -0.007387829944491386, 0.0025929147377610207, -0.11332795023918152, -0.09228451550006866, -0.08698513358831406, -0.02369394712150097, -0.012859806418418884, 0.07133068889379501, 0.03955185040831566, -0.011994556523859501, -0.0014038827503100038, 0.012593605555593967, -0.008505490608513355, -0.07954674959182739, -0.02980782277882099, -0.011932034976780415, -0.024151405319571495, -0.06431998312473297, 0.10337898135185242, -0.023508857935667038, 0.014260529540479183, -0.047555699944496155, 0.038946252316236496, 0.06922094523906708, 0.009919310919940472, -0.0615103505551815, 0.052419330924749374, -0.006891552358865738, 0.05485784634947777, -0.012994889169931412, 0.023676052689552307, -0.05617135763168335, -0.016412673518061638, -0.09853345155715942, 0.05683494359254837, -0.13537630438804626, 0.036108244210481644, 0.0013005307409912348, 0.009155789390206337, -0.05725615471601486, 0.05092545598745346, -0.034494347870349884, -0.08502286672592163, 0.04375371336936951, 0.026686308905482292, -8.636415770208887e-33, 0.0395745187997818, 0.050760332494974136, -0.051381342113018036, -0.00621928833425045, -0.0007448234828189015, 0.030443238094449043, 0.0833917185664177, -0.07078515738248825, 0.06544534862041473, -0.0477900505065918, -0.043610356748104095, -0.00021539417502935976, 0.03204625844955444, 0.029166370630264282, 0.00418338505551219, -0.04002467542886734, -0.07203896343708038, 0.04425279423594475, -0.022364333271980286, -0.0016563868848606944, 0.023871278390288353, 0.04973248392343521, -0.04863917827606201, 0.03233759105205536, 0.0031310433987528086, 0.007567828055471182, -0.10855527967214584, 0.02843216247856617, -0.003311264794319868, 0.024442998692393303, 0.09356909245252609, -0.043680403381586075, 0.006261726841330528, 0.07465814054012299, -0.0923546552658081, -0.11086668074131012, 0.0534568689763546, 0.027815645560622215, -0.05826633423566818, 0.04130500555038452, 0.07528864592313766, -0.024605361744761467, -0.05702695623040199, 0.017437828704714775, -0.0012066958006471395, 0.05777623504400253, 0.08691734820604324, -0.023761684074997902, -0.04701637849211693, 0.026678498834371567, -0.03996148332953453, 0.020552869886159897, 0.07708747684955597, 0.037369802594184875, 0.07240337133407593, 0.030454572290182114, 0.061533138155937195, -0.06707102060317993, -0.01942587085068226, 0.0035446893889456987, 0.019284352660179138, 0.03703635185956955, 0.0060923052951693535, 0.06264567375183105, 0.048844002187252045, -0.035723380744457245, -0.04030878469347954, 0.0006335105863399804, 0.0299384705722332, 0.026687420904636383, -0.03260587528347969, 0.026311462745070457, 0.011100412346422672, -0.19302940368652344, -0.01272584032267332, 0.023588091135025024, -0.06480400264263153, 0.04977663978934288, -0.05657047778367996, 0.009707219898700714, -0.06275101751089096, -0.07251391559839249, 0.03280937299132347, -0.0028545858804136515, -0.03645111247897148, -0.0015294271288439631, 0.12479786574840546, -0.05323158949613571, -0.02179974690079689, 0.02139228954911232, -0.013707056641578674, 0.05088942497968674, -0.038527436554431915, -0.005084732081741095, 0.05124123767018318, -5.551913773160777e-8, 0.07801223546266556, 0.00315646780654788, -0.047246139496564865, 0.05935124680399895, 0.06119975447654724, -0.008189573884010315, -0.06159089878201485, 0.02162768878042698, -0.026825545355677605, 0.08105865120887756, 0.04664222151041031, -0.0018227058462798595, -0.08514001965522766, -0.002939182333648205, 0.006857803091406822, 0.026692403480410576, -0.04877069219946861, -0.015642572194337845, -0.026322776451706886, -0.017039567232131958, -0.027107996866106987, -0.010542865842580795, -0.059955697506666183, 0.03279624879360199, -0.026221351698040962, 0.06355531513690948, 0.015472701750695705, 0.07722683995962143, 0.007679841481149197, -0.06218639761209488, 0.0699775293469429, -0.016119977459311485, 0.041845403611660004, -0.042958129197359085, -0.005491957068443298, -0.01033792831003666, -0.028842760249972343, 0.05830151587724686, 0.053058020770549774, 0.06617079675197601, -0.018891585990786552, -0.03791842237114906, 0.04721932113170624, 0.03893815353512764, 0.07615184783935547, -0.031219877302646637, -0.14447607100009918, -0.026046687737107277, 0.04008384793996811, -0.02602674998342991, -0.043349865823984146, -0.06915310770273209, -0.06654946506023407, 0.0012635834282264113, 0.000981681514531374, 0.059213362634181976, -0.0204923115670681, -0.02571178786456585, -0.09217211604118347, -0.0633893609046936, 0.13609613478183746, 0.024129880592226982, -0.03069355897605419, -0.02424566261470318 ]

{ "pdf_file": "3I2DH7KNN6KICUFNT6P4MKHUAPPBJD2Y.pdf", "text": "Bedford Village Elementary School 03/26/2003 660102060001 \n New York State Education Department \nSchool Accountability - Percen tage of Students Tested \n \nDistrict Bedford Centra l School District 660102 \nSchool Bedford Village Elementary School BEDS Code: 660102060001 \n \n \nNumber of Students Tested in 2001-02 \nNo Child Left Behind (NCLB) requires schools to test 95 percent of all students enrolled on the day of test \nadministration. Beginning with the tests administered in the 2002-03 school year, districts and schools must \nmeet this requirement to make adequa te yearly progress (AYP) in a subjec t and grade. The table below shows \nthe number of students tested in this school by subject and grade in the 2001-02 school year. These data are for \ninformation purposes only, not for determining AYP. While this table summarizes data for all enrolled students, \nNCLB requires 95 percent participation for each accountability group with at least 40 students. The accountability \ngroups are: all students, students fr om major racial and ethnic groups, stud ents with disabilities, students with \nlimited English proficiency and economic ally disadvantaged students. Second ary schools are accountable for the \nperformance of 100 percent of cohort members. Ther efore, the cohort performance indices for English and \nmathematics will satisfy NCLB requi rements and no separate participation measure is required. \n \nNumber Tested on Each Assessment \n Enrollment General \nAssessment Alternate \nAssessment Locally \nSelected Alternative / \nLEP Not Tested \nElementary-Level ELA 63 61 1 0 0 1 \nElementary-Level Mathematics 63 61 1 0 0 1 \nMiddle-Level ELA N/A \nMiddle-Level Mathematics N/A \n \nDefinitions: \nELA: English Language Arts \nEnrollment: Number of students enrolled in the building at the time of test administration. \nAssessments that satisfy participation requirement: \nGeneral Assessment: Count of students administered the general assessments: elementary-level ELA, elementary-level mathematics, \nmiddle-level ELA, or middle-level mathematics. \nAlternate Assessment: Count of students administered the New York State Alternate Assessment for severely disabled students. \nLocally Selected: Count of eligible students with disabilities administered a locally selected assessment (counted as Level 1) based on \nthe March 2002 memo from James Kadamus and Lawrence Gloeckler. \nAlternative/LEP: Count of limited English proficient students not requir ed to take the ELA assessment because of insufficient \nproficiency in English. Their progress in learning English was measured using an appropriate English reading assessment. \nBeginning in 2002-03, all LEP students in grades 4 and 8 are requir ed to take the ELA assessment or the New York State English \nas a Second Language Achievement Test (as appropriate) and the mathematics assessment. Any LEP student in grade 4 or 8 without a valid score on a required assessment will be counted as \"not tested.\" \nNot Tested: Count of students not tested or not receiving a valid score (bec ause of a test administration error, student did not complete \nsufficient test items, or student refusal). \n \n \n \n" }

[ -0.13754279911518097, 0.023296086117625237, 0.08683320879936218, -0.019438723102211952, -0.0007141969399526715, 0.037186138331890106, -0.023921946063637733, 0.07224725186824799, 0.05317562445998192, -0.007062496617436409, 0.07047650963068008, 0.09574040025472641, 0.00892352219671011, -0.07911165803670883, -0.07200923562049866, -0.03346658870577812, 0.031104573979973793, 0.009552103467285633, -0.03666283190250397, 0.054796647280454636, 0.09932892769575119, 0.017471764236688614, -0.03751302883028984, 0.028352130204439163, 0.010973623022437096, -0.024733612313866615, -0.06272168457508087, -0.03277801722288132, 0.008616555482149124, -0.01866922155022621, 0.003424574388191104, 0.09811219573020935, 0.030836928635835648, -0.030102036893367767, 0.021308712661266327, -0.03070436604321003, -0.005049727391451597, -0.02917715348303318, 0.03187740966677666, -0.016347847878932953, -0.023029271513223648, -0.07532373815774918, -0.05812419578433037, 0.05130285024642944, 0.030986247584223747, 0.00895628146827221, 0.002140153432264924, 0.011352001689374447, -0.08911438286304474, 0.05511928349733353, -0.008808097802102566, -0.007834709249436855, -0.05972069874405861, 0.08890097588300705, -0.03558434545993805, -0.05606323480606079, -0.012313774786889553, 0.043279677629470825, 0.013997708447277546, -0.0022477940656244755, 0.011408798396587372, -0.056850649416446686, -0.07849732786417007, -0.007337287534028292, 0.06268642097711563, -0.0018240080680698156, -0.021748345345258713, -0.06135280057787895, 0.009202335961163044, 0.04147094488143921, 0.08039897680282593, 0.02759089134633541, -0.035506993532180786, 0.0822768434882164, -0.0720255970954895, 0.02121911384165287, 0.0058111404068768024, 0.08210735768079758, 0.035376470535993576, -0.06979936361312866, 0.01923159323632717, 0.020815463736653328, -0.0025376039557158947, -0.050551097840070724, 0.05884004756808281, -0.1258472055196762, -0.04829525202512741, 0.09077693521976471, 0.09193328768014908, 0.025060761719942093, 0.05557800084352493, -0.11501961201429367, -0.025023866444826126, 0.015552614815533161, -0.06727872043848038, -0.049234285950660706, -0.008190368302166462, 0.018036119639873505, 0.05878644064068794, 0.05806315317749977, 0.06535604596138, 0.009471475146710873, -0.11366546899080276, -0.03979945555329323, 0.03428613394498825, -0.01280724722892046, -0.09822411835193634, -0.04470192268490791, -0.017086394131183624, -0.006201018113642931, -0.015535958111286163, -0.03053291141986847, 0.028871171176433563, -0.04378132149577141, -0.009459138847887516, -0.0025272206403315067, 0.03369811177253723, 0.058744847774505615, 0.04481109231710434, -0.12885025143623352, -0.009032784961163998, 0.0390724316239357, 0.03482615202665329, -0.08512423932552338, -0.0328466035425663, -0.002575269201770425, -0.0009513732511550188, 4.0007792273183164e-33, -0.0774032399058342, 0.04298456013202667, -0.040784306824207306, 0.0009655684698373079, 0.029903875663876534, -0.05844860523939133, 0.01395114604383707, 0.005881601013243198, -0.005776547361165285, -0.04210910201072693, 0.0035436893813312054, -0.010115694254636765, 0.08721037209033966, -0.06658196449279785, -0.043778348714113235, 0.022581014782190323, 0.040523942559957504, 0.06347626447677612, 0.08337892591953278, -0.000030041876016184688, 0.057025399059057236, -0.10451900959014893, -0.021428119391202927, 0.04093102365732193, -0.005737426225095987, -0.012444457039237022, -0.047886792570352554, -0.02893349528312683, -0.07970362901687622, 0.007712898310273886, 0.10278203338384628, 0.050874013453722, 0.07882559299468994, 0.032526060938835144, 0.057713206857442856, -0.04438457265496254, 0.007164408918470144, -0.08227866888046265, 0.03721523657441139, -0.005025195423513651, 0.013610845431685448, 0.06888527423143387, -0.017788955941796303, -0.01293980609625578, 0.054070327430963516, -0.017742469906806946, -0.02281937748193741, 0.0510893315076828, 0.05515711009502411, 0.026972200721502304, 0.05336793139576912, 0.055650677531957626, 0.05906658619642258, -0.07711966335773468, -0.008167964406311512, 0.0008658053120598197, -0.09510008990764618, -0.040086425840854645, -0.012760316021740437, 0.018046846613287926, 0.09727546572685242, 0.03061980940401554, -0.032800689339637756, 0.018388720229268074, -0.08557970821857452, 0.009460147470235825, -0.03034001775085926, 0.0013334698742255569, 0.014375047758221626, -0.025881202891469002, 0.022134650498628616, -0.030260689556598663, -0.011157063767313957, -0.007687723264098167, 0.03698605298995972, -0.09084015339612961, 0.060882553458213806, 0.020040981471538544, 0.006947640795260668, -0.0698305293917656, -0.07013199478387833, 0.036353979259729385, -0.06521152704954147, 0.017468774691224098, 0.00840974971652031, -0.030203985050320625, 0.03949321061372757, 0.009125691838562489, -0.013658885844051838, -0.01510579138994217, 0.012166070751845837, -0.08014201372861862, -0.07366115599870682, 0.08607469499111176, 0.11128201335668564, -3.962104361150309e-33, 0.0032030742149800062, -0.07691414654254913, -0.12302713841199875, 0.04969436302781105, -0.02394157461822033, 0.005419294815510511, 0.04974164813756943, 0.05620751157402992, 0.00556916743516922, -0.06553005427122116, -0.012856327928602695, -0.07064121961593628, 0.058621905744075775, 0.047420237213373184, -0.08085878193378448, 0.04054451733827591, -0.011355213820934296, -0.021393034607172012, -0.045042283833026886, 0.01779446192085743, 0.0643053650856018, -0.017217114567756653, 0.039556071162223816, 0.056874386966228485, 0.015453477390110493, 0.03216976299881935, -0.03424861654639244, -0.01130327582359314, 0.002741600852459669, 0.012121903710067272, -0.04420909285545349, 0.01687867008149624, -0.09347906708717346, 0.0695759728550911, 0.025857428088784218, -0.0643249899148941, 0.10325530916452408, -0.013654221780598164, -0.003867144463583827, 0.07523798197507858, 0.027662169188261032, 0.04901034012436867, -0.0000531664518348407, 0.11853153258562088, 0.015469968318939209, -0.018102042376995087, 0.01249654684215784, -0.018608050420880318, 0.0637158527970314, -0.046551600098609924, -0.0071023013442754745, -0.04914310202002525, 0.10793248564004898, 0.07212788611650467, -0.03383054584264755, -0.009340756572782993, 0.072815902531147, -0.08767680078744888, -0.009055733680725098, 0.07142335176467896, 0.07994396239519119, 0.027363112196326256, -0.02673604153096676, -0.0564860999584198, 0.05613064020872116, -0.01057939138263464, 0.030343081802129745, 0.009468154050409794, 0.08727957308292389, -0.07976148277521133, 0.04226122796535492, -0.02030629850924015, -0.05806741118431091, -0.10813634097576141, 0.02891550213098526, 0.0643574446439743, 0.10228076577186584, -0.03110670857131481, -0.1659207046031952, -0.046053461730480194, -0.08812019973993301, 0.059229396283626556, -0.05581749975681305, 0.09379534423351288, -0.03586895391345024, -0.02021358534693718, 0.006957382895052433, -0.03921855613589287, 0.007264026440680027, 0.03798879310488701, -0.012458965182304382, 0.04918321967124939, 0.03326689824461937, 0.04704279080033302, -0.08134551346302032, -5.792048085595525e-8, -0.04532201960682869, 0.025234045460820198, 0.019136479124426842, 0.016428982838988304, 0.1108371764421463, 0.027014492079615593, 0.026894479990005493, -0.02412228472530842, -0.005857810378074646, -0.14952251315116882, 0.08024045825004578, 0.02517944574356079, -0.007193625904619694, -0.03451453894376755, 0.019951051101088524, -0.0841052457690239, -0.011249338276684284, -0.036422789096832275, -0.0605330616235733, 0.000013302619663591031, -0.004346779081970453, 0.011295604519546032, 0.0202094167470932, -0.06367161124944687, -0.020576123148202896, -0.012433424592018127, 0.08060553669929504, 0.02382579818367958, -0.042290497571229935, -0.012790664099156857, -0.025861456990242004, 0.032328467816114426, 0.06682249903678894, 0.009378360584378242, -0.024426985532045364, -0.028863118961453438, 0.08925948292016983, 0.03227318078279495, -0.029182393103837967, 0.015444451943039894, -0.041560035198926926, 0.0030420836992561817, -0.037154290825128555, 0.05604510009288788, 0.060955435037612915, -0.023720650002360344, -0.0658055916428566, -0.04396733269095421, -0.004063700325787067, -0.019520383328199387, 0.037821900099515915, -0.05632972717285156, 0.006298683118075132, -0.026937514543533325, 0.042126692831516266, 0.039536405354738235, 0.002253206679597497, -0.01774800568819046, 0.009914209134876728, -0.022458190098404884, 0.041870396584272385, -0.017459319904446602, -0.002632765332236886, 0.034643497318029404 ]

{ "pdf_file": "JOANY6YW3IYN75OYEU7X3JEXQQAJPEUP.pdf", "text": "179U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce § 1.705\nfiled and ending on the date that the \nreply or other paper correcting the omission was filed; \n(8) Submission of a supplemental \nreply or other paper, other than a sup-plemental reply or other paper ex-pressly requested by the examiner, after a reply has been filed, in which case the period of adjustment set forth in §1.703 shall be reduced by the num-ber of days, if any, beginning on the day after the date the initial reply was filed and ending on the date that the supplemental reply or other such paper was filed; \n(9) Submission of an amendment or \nother paper after a decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Inter-ferences, other than a decision des-ignated as containing a new ground of rejection under §1.196(b) or statement under §1.196(c), or a decision by a Fed-eral court, less than one month before the mailing of an Office action under 35 U.S.C. 132 or notice of allowance under 35 U.S.C. 151 that requires the mailing of a supplemental Office action or sup-plemental notice of allowance, in which case the period of adjustment set \nforth in §1.703 shall be reduced by the lesser of: \n(i) The number of days, if any, begin-\nning on the day after the mailing date of the original Office action or notice of allowance and ending on the mailing date of the supplemental Office action or notice of allowance; or \n(ii) Four months; (10) Submission of an amendment \nunder §1.312 or other paper after a no-tice of allowance has been given or mailed, in which case the period of ad-justment set forth in §1.703 shall be re-duced by the lesser of: \n(i) The number of days, if any, begin-\nning on the date the amendment under §1.312 or other paper was filed and end-ing on the mailing date of the Office action or notice in response to the amendment under §1.312 or such other paper; or \n(ii) Four months; and (11) Further prosecution via a con-\ntinuing application, in which case the period of adjustment set forth in §1.703 shall not include any period that is prior to the actual filing date of the ap-plication that resulted in the patent. (d) A paper containing only an infor-\nmation disclosure statement in compli-ance with §§1.97 and 1.98 will not be considered a failure to engage in rea-sonable efforts to conclude prosecution (processing or examination) of the ap-plication under paragraphs (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9), or (c)(10) of this section if it is accompanied by a statement that each item of information contained in the information disclosure statement was cited in a communication from a for-eign patent office in a counterpart ap-plication and that this communication was not received by any individual des-ignated in §1.56(c) more than thirty days prior to the filing of the informa-tion disclosure statement. This thirty-day period is not extendable. \n(e) Submission of an application for \npatent term adjustment under §1.705(b) (with or without request under §1.705(c) for reinstatement of reduced patent term adjustment) will not be consid-ered a failure to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution (proc-essing or examination) of the applica-tion under paragraph (c)(10) of this sec-tion. \n[65 FR 56393, Sept. 18, 2000]\n§ 1.705 Patent term adjustment deter-\nmination. \n(a) The notice of allowance will in-\nclude notification of any patent term adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154(b). \n(b) Any request for reconsideration of \nthe patent term adjustment indicated in the notice of allowance, except as provided in paragraph (d) of this sec-tion, and any request for reinstatement of all or part of the term reduced pur-suant to §1.704(b) must be by way of an application for patent term adjust-ment. An application for patent term adjustment under this section must be filed no later than the payment of the issue fee but may not be filed earlier than the date of mailing of the notice of allowance. An application for patent term adjustment under this section must be accompanied by: \n(1) The fee set forth in §1.18(e); and (2) A statement of the facts involved, \nspecifying: \n(i) The correct patent term adjust-\nment and the basis or bases under §1.702 for the adjustment; \nVerDate Dec<13>2002 11:53 Feb 03, 2003 Jkt 197133 PO 00000 Frm 00179 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\\SGML\\197133T.XXX 197133T 18037 CFR Ch. I (7–1–02 Edition) § 1.710 \n(ii) The relevant dates as specified in \n§§1.703(a) through (e) for which an ad-justment is sought and the adjustment as specified in §1.703(f) to which the patent is entitled; \n(iii) Whether the patent is subject to \na terminal disclaimer and any expira-tion date specified in the terminal dis-claimer; and \n(iv)(A) Any circumstances during the \nprosecution of the application result-ing in the patent that constitute a fail-ure to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude processing or examination of such application as set forth in §1.704; or \n(B) That there were no circumstances \nconstituting a failure to engage in rea-sonable efforts to conclude processing or examination of such application as set forth in §1.704. \n(c) Any application for patent term \nadjustment under this section that re-quests reinstatement of all or part of the period of adjustment reduced pur-suant to §1.704(b) for failing to reply to a rejection, objection, argument, or other request within three months of the date of mailing of the Office com-munication notifying the applicant of the rejection, objection, argument, or other request must also be accom-panied by: \n(1) The fee set forth in §1.18(f); and (2) A showing to the satisfaction of \nthe Commissioner that, in spite of all due care, the applicant was unable to reply to the rejection, objection, argu-ment, or other request within three months of the date of mailing of the Office communication notifying the ap-plicant of the rejection, objection, ar-gument, or other request. The Office shall not grant any request for rein-statement for more than three addi-tional months for each reply beyond three months from the date of mailing of the Office communication notifying the applicant of the rejection, objec-tion, argument, or other request. \n(d) If the patent is issued on a date \nother than the projected date of issue and this change necessitates a revision of the patent term adjustment indi-cated in the notice of allowance, the patent will indicate the revised patent term adjustment. If the patent indi-cates a revised patent term adjustment due to the patent being issued on a date other than the projected date of \nissue, any request for reconsideration of the patent term adjustment indi-cated in the patent must be filed with-in thirty days of the date the patent issued and must comply with the re-quirements of paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section. \n(e) The periods set forth in this sec-\ntion are not extendable. \n(f) No submission or petition on be-\nhalf of a third party concerning patent term adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154(b) will be considered by the Office. Any such submission or petition will be re-turned to the third party, or otherwise disposed of, at the convenience of the Office. \n[65 FR 56394, Sept. 18, 2000]\nEXTENSION OF PATENT TERMDUE TO \nREGULATORY REVIEW\n§ 1.710 Patents subject to extension of \nthe patent term. \n(a) A patent is eligible for extension \nof the patent term if the patent claims a product as defined in paragraph (b) of this section, either alone or in com-bination with other ingredients that read on a composition that received permission for commercial marketing or use, or a method of using such a product, or a method of manufacturing such a product, and meets all other conditions and requirements of this subpart. \n(b) The term product referred to in \nparagraph (a) of this section means— \n(1) The active ingredient of a new \nhuman drug, antibiotic drug, or human biological product (as those terms are used in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Public Health Service Act) including any salt or ester of the active ingredient, as a single en-tity or in combination with another ac-tive ingredient; or \n(2) The active ingredient of a new \nanimal drug or veterinary biological product (as those terms are used in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act) that is not primarily manufactured using re-combinant DNA, recombinant RNA, hybridoma technology, or other proc-esses including site specific genetic manipulation techniques, including \nVerDate Dec<13>2002 11:53 Feb 03, 2003 Jkt 197133 PO 00000 Frm 00180 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\\SGML\\197133T.XXX 197133T" }

[ -0.04674479365348816, -0.015039621852338314, 0.00407836539670825, 0.017325693741440773, -0.011509353294968605, 0.025623729452490807, -0.06059286743402481, -0.04648825153708458, -0.09735582768917084, 0.13340231776237488, 0.07111873477697372, 0.0029134142678231, -0.06450171768665314, -0.03814900666475296, 0.009872861206531525, 0.05181392282247543, 0.08300738781690598, 0.09937005490064621, 0.00850656721740961, 0.04016194865107536, 0.06314956396818161, 0.03571285307407379, -0.06370799988508224, 0.01901811547577381, 0.0396328866481781, 0.0178811177611351, -0.006562602706253529, 0.049501530826091766, 0.040223535150289536, -0.03480302542448044, 0.009301475249230862, 0.007178215775638819, 0.1006876602768898, 0.001326767378486693, 0.1415860950946808, 0.046263955533504486, 0.01186144445091486, -0.05457879602909088, 0.018433934077620506, 0.005464544054120779, 0.0008096221135929227, -0.05119973421096802, -0.010858766734600067, 0.06320042163133621, -0.10161034017801285, 0.03491586074233055, 0.006432387977838516, -0.026169806718826294, -0.040514517575502396, 0.02092239260673523, 0.00839223526418209, 0.08286288380622864, -0.011646234430372715, -0.006934174802154303, -0.05210854113101959, 0.01110313180834055, -0.021613141521811485, 0.047432709485292435, 0.05906834453344345, -0.08178851753473282, -0.013026452623307705, 0.03968483582139015, -0.09278697520494461, -0.029983660206198692, 0.013754414394497871, -0.006016625091433525, -0.0681837797164917, -0.06490495800971985, 0.027968253940343857, -0.020989414304494858, 0.06297937780618668, -0.05608672648668289, 0.012010229751467705, -0.0162056852132082, 0.05634886398911476, 0.03483682498335838, -0.03497451916337013, 0.13149677217006683, 0.06578971445560455, -0.05644512176513672, 0.05083615705370903, 0.004909258335828781, -0.01993177831172943, -0.026619214564561844, -0.06200568377971649, -0.01020412240177393, -0.05924093723297119, 0.06209491193294525, 0.07665669918060303, 0.009356874041259289, 0.11967860162258148, 0.03600824624300003, -0.013286679983139038, -0.04691052436828613, 0.05464431270956993, -0.06522609293460846, -0.08632532507181168, -0.018723586574196815, 0.08105155825614929, 0.05734184384346008, -0.0228517297655344, -0.03942341357469559, -0.04906998574733734, -0.025625303387641907, 0.05161521956324577, -0.07347114384174347, 0.0719882994890213, -0.04057728126645088, 0.052842434495687485, 0.02174842357635498, -0.007219590712338686, 0.031630322337150574, -0.008171441964805126, -0.028770070523023605, -0.0018899377901107073, 0.02810748480260372, 0.0040313927456736565, -0.02940618060529232, 0.06017366051673889, -0.08761496841907501, 0.07221218943595886, -0.03194116801023483, 0.019479304552078247, -0.09732457995414734, 0.12577228248119354, -0.048922356218099594, -0.056534383445978165, 5.966246556853475e-33, -0.014311683364212513, 0.006638705264776945, -0.04918355122208595, 0.04391803219914436, -0.037830036133527756, -0.04754270240664482, 0.029345981776714325, -0.010748031549155712, 0.027218708768486977, -0.02280532941222191, 0.015189744532108307, 0.014520220458507538, -0.04865119606256485, -0.04038366302847862, -0.007067765109241009, -0.0431460440158844, -0.000514822022523731, 0.01150108128786087, -0.04758451133966446, 0.07389052212238312, 0.008383872918784618, -0.06685616821050644, 0.02240927703678608, -0.006246749311685562, -0.05538998916745186, -0.05581129714846611, -0.014816910959780216, 0.013789319433271885, 0.052293334156274796, 0.05316305160522461, 0.03989890590310097, 0.006523988209664822, 0.10211081802845001, -0.029864801093935966, -0.03000919707119465, 0.07586536556482315, -0.0952853113412857, -0.013658064417541027, -0.01303698681294918, -0.03098425641655922, -0.09312617778778076, -0.007413334678858519, 0.027144085615873337, 0.006680611055344343, 0.04001815989613533, -0.01970033533871174, -0.03733956441283226, -0.04686583951115608, -0.007600262761116028, 0.05353934317827225, 0.1123112142086029, -0.029556334018707275, -0.05635518953204155, -0.040411725640296936, 0.012299413792788982, -0.06809403747320175, -0.06180718541145325, 0.019086284562945366, -0.03053184039890766, 0.04701722785830498, 0.015267927199602127, 0.047102633863687515, -0.041329167783260345, 0.03712056204676628, -0.07410532236099243, -0.07622246444225311, -0.035616256296634674, 0.0627567246556282, 0.1065012663602829, -0.03930458799004555, 0.04400480166077614, 0.013043791055679321, -0.06693413853645325, -0.007263728883117437, -0.06647414714097977, -0.07203277945518494, 0.027327589690685272, 0.05843806266784668, 0.0027482607401907444, -0.044048938900232315, 0.03921853005886078, -0.005665216129273176, -0.04867572709918022, 0.02698625810444355, 0.06187758594751358, -0.01362039614468813, 0.027354789897799492, 0.033394452184438705, -0.05234307423233986, -0.039800189435482025, 0.07371001690626144, -0.07899270951747894, -0.005745153874158859, -0.01468132808804512, 0.06203577667474747, -5.92911673107283e-33, -0.019290078431367874, -0.07822179794311523, -0.088755764067173, 0.007458455860614777, -0.11288568377494812, 0.019097087904810905, -0.023342691361904144, -0.12691223621368408, 0.025838017463684082, -0.04196248576045036, -0.04786349833011627, -0.07102847844362259, 0.045207370072603226, -0.019863273948431015, -0.0999489277601242, -0.05118018016219139, -0.05901355296373367, -0.045287322252988815, 0.05014294013381004, 0.069900281727314, 0.07263711094856262, 0.013819968327879906, -0.009320505894720554, 0.00778318103402853, -0.04280255362391472, -0.018799535930156708, -0.09929502755403519, 0.04728899151086807, 0.022486303001642227, 0.011391675099730492, -0.06842798739671707, -0.05402006581425667, -0.09358257800340652, 0.0626695305109024, -0.008578487671911716, -0.06017822027206421, 0.06551824510097504, 0.05696114897727966, -0.06168611720204353, 0.01257698331028223, 0.07161816954612732, -0.013785231858491898, -0.0021061613224446774, -0.018895510584115982, -0.008405311033129692, 0.07185475528240204, 0.03098284639418125, -0.05295197665691376, -0.022265121340751648, 0.008914203383028507, 0.024719584733247757, 0.03808083012700081, 0.06801891326904297, 0.027226021513342857, -0.016579775139689445, -0.013323374092578888, 0.027655668556690216, -0.028407808393239975, -0.0011309554101899266, 0.04765923693776131, 0.07480797916650772, 0.08699445426464081, -0.035442572087049484, 0.03352167084813118, 0.0979289636015892, -0.017040256410837173, -0.040749646723270416, -0.08307704329490662, 0.032811183482408524, 0.012177701108157635, -0.09378792345523834, -0.07923214882612228, -0.06652947515249252, -0.026009945198893547, 0.06823650747537613, 0.022429026663303375, 0.053050968796014786, 0.0035582168493419886, -0.08297060430049896, -0.02780281752347946, -0.05430939048528671, 0.018327342346310616, -0.08509639650583267, 0.023529034107923508, 0.04407203942537308, -0.014897064305841923, 0.06454400718212128, -0.027220264077186584, 0.033951904624700546, 0.14717718958854675, -0.025320658460259438, 0.10233090072870255, 0.04954588785767555, 0.09697546809911728, -0.06450790911912918, -5.581167528134756e-8, -0.005284976214170456, 0.05062589421868324, -0.10806075483560562, -0.023351002484560013, 0.06155354157090187, 0.007002608384937048, -0.015332821756601334, 0.0048457239754498005, 0.017813894897699356, 0.015265687368810177, 0.05286487564444542, 0.029792414978146553, 0.044754885137081146, -0.07720422744750977, 0.0036701136268675327, -0.005196182522922754, 0.03212931007146835, -0.009252889081835747, -0.04229089990258217, 0.05694560334086418, 0.000153096261783503, -0.015126165933907032, -0.08985066413879395, 0.04917614534497261, 0.008338049054145813, -0.028466682881116867, -0.041448477655649185, 0.04428037256002426, 0.0013766768388450146, 0.06501921266317368, 0.03781832009553909, 0.05098371580243111, 0.009444178082048893, -0.021224787458777428, -0.01926662027835846, 0.0011039786040782928, -0.017718352377414703, 0.0045099263079464436, 0.044110432267189026, -0.007502855267375708, -0.062081385403871536, 0.058901503682136536, -0.01864851824939251, -0.016250383108854294, -0.005864003673195839, -0.025958597660064697, -0.08399011939764023, -0.020774375647306442, 0.02476949617266655, -0.04680006206035614, -0.04783003777265549, -0.04519014433026314, -0.013065631501376629, -0.0029078612569719553, 0.06303524225950241, -0.020383814349770546, 0.0922699123620987, 0.005211442708969116, 0.01697581075131893, -0.06870804727077484, 0.04404035955667496, 0.08699340373277664, -0.010475851595401764, 0.09007705748081207 ]

{ "pdf_file": "O4Z3IEED7ROYYCKDRARK2BBHSZGR4M5Y.pdf", "text": "Changes in Procedural Regulations Help to Streamline Appeals Before HAC\nby Glenna Sheveland Alan LeBovidge\nCommissioner\nGerard D. Perry\nDeputy CommissionerA Publication of the Department of Revenue’s Division of Local ServicesCityandTown\nVolume 18, No. 8 September 2005\nHAC Implements Changes to its\nRegulatory Procedures\nEffective July 2, 2004, the Housing Ap-\npeals Committee (HAC) began imple-mentation of new procedural ruleswhich allowed for, among other things,a motion practice and the use of pre-filed testimony. These procedural re-forms were implemented as an affirma-tive step towards reducing the backlogof housing development proposalspending before the HAC.\nBackground\nThe Massachusetts ComprehensivePermit Law (M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Secs.20–23) was enacted in 1969 to promotethe construction of low- and moderate-income housing. The law envisions thatmunicipalities will work with developersto create affordable housing for individ-uals who would otherwise not be ableto afford such an opportunity. The Com-prehensive Permit Law also allows foran expedited administrative appeal tothe HAC whenever a comprehensivepermit is denied by a municipality orgranted with conditions that might ren-der construction of the proposed hous-ing uneconomic and therefore imprac-tical to build.\nA decrease in available buildable land,\nan increase in restrictive local regula-tions, and most importantly, a changein the availability of qualifying fundingsources, have all led to an intensifiedinterest by developers in the use of thecomprehensive permit process as ameans by which to develop new hous-ing throughout the Commonwealth.This increased demand for compre-hensive permits in turn had resulted ina backlog of appeals before the HAC.\nTo determine ways in which the appealprocess could be expedited, an Advi-sory Committee was formed in Augustof 2003, to review and recommendchanges to the procedural process thathad been in use, for the most part, byHAC since its inception in 1969. TheAdvisory Committee identified severaladministrative and procedural changesthat it believed would substantially im-prove the appeal process before theHAC. The most significant changes pro-posed included an increase in staffingfor the HAC, encouraging voluntarysettlement between the parties, andchanges in the procedural regulationsto include a motion practice and theuse of prefiled testimony.\nAddition of a Motion Practice\nAlthough not yet quantified, it is be-lieved that the expansion of the motionpractice has had an unexpected im-pact on the comprehensive permit ap-peal process. In fact, it is currently sug-gested that the motion practice hashad the effect of promoting voluntarysettlement through the early resolutionof issues that are either purely proce-dural considerations or are based onpreviously resolved substantive issuesof law. Although motions can be madeorally, under the new procedures theyare usually made in writing. The prac-tice also allows the parties to request ahearing on the motion, which may beheld at the discretion of the presidingofficer. The hearing officer may alsodecide to deny the motion without prej-udice or wait to decide the motion untilcompletion of the hearing in the interestof expediting the hearing on the merits.Preliminary motions must be made\nwithin 30 days after the initial confer-ence of counsel. Municipalities shouldlook closely at the types of preliminarymotions available under 760 CMR30.07, as they are predominately mo-tions that a municipality would chooseto make. For example, a preliminarymotion may be made by the municipal-ity to dismiss the appeal for failure ofthe developer to meet the eligibility re-quirements for approval of a compre-hensive permit, or the municipality maybe able to show that it has met one ofthe statutorily defined minimal require-ments for affordable housing, or themunicipality may show that the devel-oper had attempted to file for a com-prehensive permit within 12 months ofhaving been denied or having volun-tarily withdrawn a request for variance,special permit, or subdivision approvalfor the same piece of property and thatthe prior proposal included no signifi-cant amount of low- or moderate-\ncontinued on page eight\nInside This Issue\nFrom the Deputy Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . 2\nLegal\nMunicipal Collective Bargaining Requestfor Funding Obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2\nFocus\nFY05 Average Single-Family Tax Billsand Assessed Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3\nProcurement of Banking Services . . . . . . . . . . . 7DLS Update\nGraziano and Sandell Earn Designation. . . . . . . 9Schedule A Reminder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Municipal Job Duties Online . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9\nDLS Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10\nState Revenues Eclipse Expectations by\n$436 Million in FY05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 board recommended the contingent\nbudget, but indicated that if the bal-anced budget were adopted, $725,000would have to be reallocated from otherdepartments to the fire department tomeet the minimum staffing obligation.\nThe union sought an injunction, pur-\nsuant to \nBillerica v. International Asso-\nciation of Firefighters, Local 1495 , 415\nMass. 692 (1993), to require an uncon-ditional appropriation request. A supe-rior court judge so ordered and thetown complied, but appealed the deci-sion. The town voted to fund the provi-sion, but also voted the override. Theunion requested the case be dismissedas moot, but the SJC agreed to a reviewto decide the issue as one that wouldbe likely to recur and was in need ofclarification.\nThe SJC held that the contingent appro-\npriation request was not a good faithrequest to fully fund the contract. Themajority reviewed the preceding caselaw concerning minimum staffing pro-visions, which had held they were sub-ject to annual appropriation. \nBillerica,\nsupra & Boston Teacher’s Union, Local\n66 v. Boston , 382 Mass. 553 (1981) &\n386 Mass. 197 (1982). Nevertheless, insuch circumstances the town executiveofficers are required to request fundingof the minimum staffing provisions andto support the request, citing severalMassachusetts Labor Relations Com-mission decisions.\nThe SJC majority ruled that nothing in\nM.G.L. Ch. 59, Sec. 21C(m) authorizesthe board of selectmen to submit a bud-get contingent on an override and thatit is town meeting that may make suchcontingent appropriations. However,the majority did acknowledge the roleof the finance committee in makingbudget recommendations. The majorityalso found that although M.G.L. Ch. 59,Sec. 21C(m) was not listed in M.G.L.Municipal Collective\nBargaining Requestfor FundingObligations\nby Gary A. Blau\nIn the case of Local 1652, International\nAssociation of Firefighters v. Town of\nFramingham , 442 Mass 463 (2004),\nthe Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruledthat the town bargaining representa-tives’ request for funding an executedcollective bargaining agreement couldnot be made contingent upon the pas-sage of a Proposition 2\n1⁄2override. In\nthis 4–3 decision, the majority ruled thatthe collective bargaining law, M.G.L.Ch. 150E, Sec. 7(b) required that whenan agreement was reached between aunion and the town’s chief executive of-ficers, those officers must submit anunconditional request for funding to thelegislative body.\nThe facts of the case are straightfor-\nward. The town and firefighters’ unionentered into a collective bargainingagreement for July 1, 2000 throughJune 30, 2003, which included a mini-mum staffing provision requiring 30 fire-fighters per shift. In FY02, the secondyear of the contract, a 7 percent bud-get shortfall was projected. The townmanager and board of selectmen pro-posed a budget requesting funds tocover the minimum staffing provision(and to restore all projected budgetcuts), but made the funding vote con-tingent on the passage of an overrideunder M.G.L. Ch. 59, Sec. 21C(m). Al-ternatively, the manager and selectmenproposed a balanced budget within thetown’s levy limit under M.G.L. Ch. 59,Sec. 21C (Proposition 2\n1⁄2), which\nwould cut all town departments by 7percent and therefore would not be suf-ficient to fund the minimum staffing pro-vision as proposed. The manager andCity & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 2\nFrom the Deputy\nCommissioner\nDuring the certifi-\ncation process theBureau of LocalAssessment hasnoticed that someassessors do not\nmake valuation changes as a resultof issues revealed during the publicdisclosure process. Some assessorsactually discourage taxpayers fromreporting valuation matters until theabatement process.\nThe Division of Local Services dis-\ncourages these practices becausewe believe they are shortsighted.Waiting for the abatement processto act is problematic for two reasons.First, an early review of taxpayer’scomplaints can lead to the revelationof a systemic valuation problem. If itis not corrected as a result of the dis-closure period then only complainingtaxpayers who file abatements canbe remedied while all other taxpayerswith comparable problems are notafforded similar treatment. Second,making changes during the disclo-sure process does not affect overlaybalances. Waiting until the tax ratehas been set wastes money onabatements that could be used forproductive community purposes.\nConsequently, if the Bureau feels that\ninsufficient time or attention has beengiven to the disclosure process,including not making the requisitechanges prior to tax rate setting, it willinsist that assessors rectify the prob-lem prior to final certification. Asses-sors are encouraged to review thepublic disclosure section of the \nGuide-\nlines for Development of a Minimum\nReassessment Program on pages\n18–19 for compliance.\nGerard D. Perry\nDeputy Commissioner\nLegal in Our Opinion\ncontinued on page eight City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 3\nFY05 Average Single-\nFamily Tax Bills andAssessed Values\nby Scott Dressel\nThis Focus article reviews fiscal year\n2005 single-family tax bills and propertyvalues across the Commonwealth. As inprevious years, this article ranks com-munities statewide. It also highlightssome major trends and discusses theimpact on single-family tax bills. Theanalyses are based on FY05 data re-ported to the Department of Revenue’sDivision of Local Services (DLS) by thelocal assessors.\nAverage single-family tax bills are cal-\nculated by summing the assessedvalue of all of the single-family parcelsof each community. Dividing this totalby the number of parcels results in theaverage single-family property value.The average value is divided by onethousand and then multiplied by theresidential tax rate.\nThe 11 cities and towns that have\nadopted a residential exemption arenot included in this analysis becausethey do not submit sufficiently detailed\ndata to DLS to determine their averagetax bills. Two communities (Hancockand Wendell) had not set tax rates atthe time this article was written. There-fore, they were excluded from the analy-sis as well.\nStatewide Trends\nOver each of the past 10 years, the av-erage single-family tax bill has in-creased in both constant and actualdollars (\nsee Figure 2 ). In actual dollars,\nthe annual increase over the prioryear’s tax bill has ranged from 3.8 per-cent in 1999 to 6.7 percent in 2002. In2005, the average bill increased by 5.2percent. This trend has continued evenas the average single-family tax rateacross the Commonwealth has de-creased in each of the past sevenyears from a high of $14.92 per $1,000in 1998 to $10.17 per $1,000 in 2005.Much of the increase in the average billis attributable to rising residential as-sessed values, stagnant growth in thecommercial and industrial sectors, andrelatively flat state aid budgets.\nThe average single-family property\nvalue realized a double-digit increase\nFigure 1for the fifth consecutive year. In 2005,the average value increased by 14.8percent, from $307,361 to $352,911.Even in constant dollar terms, the in-crease reached 11.7 percent (\nsee Fig-\nure 3 ).\nFurthermore, the share of the total tax\nburden borne by residential propertyowners has increased in each of thepast five years, from 67.9 percent in1999 to 72.1 percent in 2005. This ismainly due to the fact that commercial,industrial, and personal (CIP) propertyvalues have not kept pace with the in-creasing residential values. It also re-flects the rollback of Chapter 3 of theActs of 2004.\nSeveral “split rate” communities\nadopted Chapter 3 of the Acts of 2004,temporarily allowing them to increasethe amount by which they shift the taxburden to CIP taxpayers. Before thisprovision, these communities were re-stricted from taxing CIP properties morethan 175 percent of the taxes theywould have paid under a single rate.The provision temporarily increased thislimit to 200 percent but started to roll itback in 2005. By 2009 the communitiesthat adopted the increased shift will beallowed a maximum CIP percentage of170, down from the preexisting 175.This will likely add to the weight of thetax burden on residential taxpayers inthese communities.\nAggregate state aid across the Com-\nmonwealth increased from about $4.81billion in 2004 to $4.95 billion in 2005.As far back as 2002, the figure wasabout $5.13 billion. Clearly, state aidhas not kept pace with 2002 growingcosts and services. This puts pressureon cities and towns to cover their ex-panding needs through using unusedlevy capacity or pursuing overrides.\nOne factor that mitigated the rate of in-\ncrease in the average tax bill was a de-Focus on Municipal Finance\nTax Bill (in dollars)\n500–1,900 (24)1,900–2,600 (75)2,600–3,300 (96)3,300–5,200 (98)5,200–11,800 (46)\nExcludes communities with Residential Exemptions FY2005 Average Single Family Tax Bill\ncontinued on page six City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 4FY04 and FY05 Average Single-Family Tax Bills and Assessed Values\nFY04 FY05 Pct. FY04 FY05 Pct. FY05 FY05\navg. avg. change avg. avg. change hi-lo tax\nMunicipality value value value tax bill tax bill bill ^rank^ rate\nAbington 297,469 335,172 12.7 3,623 3,623 0.0 110 10.81\nActon 466,751 499,657 7.1 6,549 6,900 5.4 18 13.81Acushnet 214,000 246,611 15.2 2,517 2,688 6.8 228 10.90Adams 100,564 105,164 4.6 1,713 1,847 7.8 316 17.56Agawam 148,567 172,477 16.1 2,191 2,320 5.9 270 13.45\nAlford 362,514 501,149 38.2 2,411 2,481 2.9 252 4.95\nAmesbury 280,213 320,493 14.4 4,416 4,564 3.4 57 14.24Amherst 236,015 279,238 18.3 4,107 4,660 13.5 56 16.69Andover 497,785 522,042 4.9 5,710 6,009 5.2 30 11.51Aquinnah 729,143 988,564 35.6 3,376 3,588 6.3 114 3.63\nArlington 414,125 415,167 0.3 4,406 4,542 3.1 58 10.94\nAshburnham 188,756 214,231 13.5 2,514 2,905 15.6 186 13.56Ashby 205,506 232,679 13.2 2,770 2,748 -0.8 215 11.81Ashfield 161,899 194,193 19.9 2,466 2,606 5.7 239 13.42Ashland 312,432 343,035 9.8 4,377 4,713 7.7 54 13.74\nAthol 135,002 159,437 18.1 1,490 1,553 4.2 323 9.74\nAttleboro 187,001 270,436 44.6 2,495 2,729 9.4 219 10.09Auburn 200,116 217,684 8.8 2,341 2,580 10.2 243 11.85Avon 186,243 290,074 55.8 2,432 2,750 13.1 214 9.48Ayer 232,777 272,169 16.9 2,337 2,469 5.6 254 9.07\nBarnstable 404,619 460,173 13.7 2,675 2,784 4.1 211 6.05\nBarre 172,171 203,985 18.5 2,083 2,391 14.8 260 11.72Becket 157,431 163,713 4.0 1,562 1,657 6.1 320 10.12Bedford 444,397 486,567 9.5 5,031 5,440 8.1 39 11.18Belchertown 186,570 210,906 13.0 3,116 3,187 2.3 158 15.11\nBellingham 245,500 260,318 6.0 2,553 2,684 5.1 229 10.31\nBelmont 689,809 718,971 4.2 7,388 7,686 4.0 10 10.69Berkley 249,073 299,546 20.3 2,272 2,342 3.1 269 7.82Berlin 332,550 372,862 12.1 4,183 4,519 8.0 60 12.12Bernardston 151,905 151,697 -0.1 2,280 2,609 14.4 238 17.20\nBeverly 372,946 422,989 13.4 4,073 4,247 4.3 70 10.04\nBillerica 289,516 313,531 8.3 3,162 3,449 9.1 130 11.00Blackstone 232,737 248,535 6.8 2,609 2,863 9.7 195 11.52Blandford 164,010 167,719 2.3 2,254 2,050 -9.1 302 12.22Bolton 452,878 466,413 3.0 5,996 6,516 8.7 23 13.97\nBoston*\nBourne 347,540 401,984 15.7 2,561 2,689 5.0 227 6.69Boxborough 485,822 508,428 4.7 6,471 6,660 2.9 21 13.10Boxford 513,225 607,716 18.4 6,297 6,399 1.6 24 10.53Boylston 326,914 376,617 15.2 3,760 4,384 16.6 67 11.64\nBraintree 298,439 351,407 17.7 2,850 2,945 3.3 183 8.38\nBrewster 344,173 431,736 25.4 2,509 2,616 4.3 236 6.06Bridgewater 278,533 342,577 23.0 3,156 3,344 6.0 139 9.76Brimfield 149,925 197,678 31.9 2,699 2,851 5.6 196 14.42Brockton 211,575 239,735 13.3 2,435 2,546 4.6 246 10.62\nBrookfield 173,103 176,802 2.1 2,723 2,875 5.6 190 16.26\nBrookline*Buckland 140,433 152,959 8.9 2,135 2,301 7.8 271 15.04Burlington 340,233 368,476 8.3 2,756 2,985 8.3 178 8.10Cambridge*\nCanton 412,259 440,243 6.8 3,776 4,147 9.8 75 9.42\nCarlisle 723,044 730,874 1.1 9,016 9,224 2.3 4 12.62Carver 229,224 278,029 21.3 3,211 3,328 3.6 142 11.97Charlemont 140,061 159,935 14.2 2,586 2,732 5.6 218 17.08Charlton 169,010 254,698 50.7 2,251 2,407 6.9 256 9.45\nChatham 616,717 730,816 18.5 2,775 2,879 3.7 189 3.94\nChelmsford 320,799 331,102 3.2 4,212 4,467 6.1 63 13.49Chelsea*Cheshire 125,026 151,334 21.0 1,475 1,542 4.5 328 10.19Chester 112,365 120,961 7.7 2,286 2,269 -0.7 278 18.76FY04 FY05 Pct. FY04 FY05 Pct. FY05 FY05\navg. avg. change avg. avg. change hi-lo tax\nMunicipality value value value tax bill tax bill bill ^rank^ rate\nChesterfield 151,845 154,579 1.8 2,800 2,867 2.4 192 18.55\nChicopee 111,958 149,123 33.2 1,951 2,034 4.3 305 13.64Chilmark 1,524,515 1,535,213 0.7 2,790 3,009 7.8 176 1.96Clarksburg 118,976 120,825 1.6 1,350 1,398 3.6 325 11.57Clinton 182,925 227,442 24.3 2,473 2,654 7.3 231 11.67\nCohasset 622,072 747,522 20.2 7,396 7,804 5.5 9 10.44\nColrain 130,307 139,492 7.0 2,030 2,282 12.4 275 16.36Concord 754,200 898,455 19.1 7,987 8,805 10.2 6 9.80Conway 179,663 248,377 38.2 3,342 3,651 9.2 106 14.70Cummington 150,231 173,323 15.4 1,983 2,049 3.3 303 11.82\nDalton 152,170 160,349 5.4 2,578 2,829 9.7 203 17.64\nDanvers 352,031 364,921 3.7 3,844 3,751 -2.4 100 10.28Dartmouth 301,070 355,635 18.1 2,514 2,649 5.4 232 7.45Dedham 361,422 384,309 6.3 3,697 4,028 9.0 87 10.48Deerfield 176,080 225,173 27.9 2,192 2,646 20.7 233 11.75\nDennis 345,909 381,410 10.3 1,685 1,743 3.4 317 4.57\nDighton 237,372 270,433 13.9 2,687 2,883 7.3 188 10.66Douglas 183,705 268,064 45.9 3,027 2,962 -2.1 181 11.05Dover 933,673 1,066,814 14.3 8,412 9,004 7.0 5 8.44Dracut 227,853 286,669 25.8 2,752 2,835 3.0 201 9.89\nDudley 165,313 232,329 40.5 1,749 1,949 11.4 311 8.39\nDunstable 332,289 375,462 13.0 4,675 4,791 2.5 52 12.76Duxbury 510,324 576,186 12.9 5,782 5,843 1.1 32 10.14E. Bridgewater 284,409 308,389 8.4 3,089 3,402 10.1 136 11.03E. Brookfield 139,808 221,286 58.3 1,943 2,293 18.0 274 10.36\nE. Longmeadow 168,204 217,798 29.5 3,487 3,681 5.6 104 16.90\nEastham 396,729 420,278 5.9 2,031 2,198 8.2 288 5.23Easthampton 166,035 193,718 16.7 2,263 2,385 5.4 263 12.31Easton 335,229 377,850 12.7 3,825 4,039 5.6 85 10.69Edgartown 790,712 957,862 21.1 2,775 2,921 5.3 185 3.05\nEgremont 312,929 333,822 6.7 2,635 2,724 3.4 222 8.16\nErving 121,961 143,031 17.3 771 908 17.8 331 6.35Essex 400,496 436,991 9.1 4,081 4,435 8.7 64 10.15Everett 225,101 278,862 23.9 1,855 2,376 28.1 264 8.52Fairhaven 185,942 252,734 35.9 2,032 2,110 3.8 296 8.35\nFall River 180,539 208,549 15.5 1,482 1,587 7.1 321 7.61\nFalmouth 339,818 458,494 34.9 2,576 2,673 3.8 230 5.83Fitchburg 163,097 184,037 12.8 2,254 2,365 4.9 266 12.85Florida 79,063 80,673 2.0 921 940 2.1 330 11.65Foxborough 343,485 354,761 3.3 3,720 3,878 4.2 96 10.93\nFramingham 298,845 350,237 17.2 3,978 4,129 3.8 76 11.79\nFranklin 305,456 383,268 25.5 3,372 3,515 4.2 124 9.17Freetown 257,198 282,320 9.8 2,703 2,789 3.2 208 9.88Gardner 122,519 187,162 52.8 2,231 2,353 5.5 267 12.57Georgetown 354,411 398,397 12.4 3,456 3,613 4.5 113 9.07\nGill 126,002 168,050 33.4 2,428 2,405 -0.9 258 14.31\nGloucester 408,780 463,014 13.3 3,928 4,162 6.0 72 8.99Goshen 142,506 168,511 18.2 2,468 2,587 4.8 241 15.35Gosnold 497,948 553,686 11.2 1,210 1,251 3.4 333 2.26Grafton 303,870 335,468 10.4 3,285 3,486 6.1 126 10.39\nGranby 157,226 198,144 26.0 2,390 2,711 13.4 226 13.68\nGranville 189,787 193,450 1.9 2,596 2,631 1.3 235 13.60Grt. Barrington 228,401 245,488 7.5 3,357 3,623 7.9 111 14.76Greenfield 134,255 156,645 16.7 2,827 2,990 5.8 177 19.09Groton 349,227 410,961 17.7 5,392 5,688 5.5 36 13.84\nGroveland 323,559 370,517 14.5 3,297 3,475 5.4 128 9.38\nHadley 174,934 238,028 36.1 2,293 2,387 4.1 262 10.03Halifax 255,967 295,014 15.3 3,279 3,422 4.4 133 11.60Hamilton 442,646 483,780 9.3 5,524 6,057 9.6 28 12.52Hampden 187,276 223,683 19.4 3,266 3,494 7.0 125 15.62FY04 FY05 Pct. FY04 FY05 Pct. FY05 FY05\navg. avg. change avg. avg. change hi-lo tax\nMunicipality value value value tax bill tax bill bill ^rank^ rate\nHanover 342,752 441,531 28.8 4,689 4,751 1.3 53 10.76\nHanson 312,003 314,889 0.9 3,476 3,218 -7.4 152 10.22Hardwick 142,640 163,092 14.3 2,171 2,075 -4.4 298 12.72Harvard 505,184 630,860 24.9 5,845 6,315 8.0 26 10.01Harwich 413,975 446,863 7.9 2,732 2,788 2.0 209 6.24\nHatfield 214,316 230,385 7.5 2,677 2,850 6.5 197 12.37\nHaverhill 218,394 278,724 27.6 2,835 2,985 5.3 179 10.71Hawley 110,557 112,514 1.8 2,277 2,239 -1.7 283 19.90Heath 107,909 147,868 37.0 2,379 2,712 14.0 225 18.34Hingham 512,040 580,633 13.4 5,469 5,783 5.7 33 9.96\nHinsdale 135,973 146,814 8.0 2,089 2,167 3.7 291 14.76\nHolbrook 240,246 274,448 14.2 3,416 3,579 4.8 116 13.04Holden 235,979 275,512 16.8 3,318 3,576 7.8 117 12.98Holland 161,349 175,139 8.5 2,265 2,298 1.5 272 13.12Holliston 344,740 364,311 5.7 5,112 5,293 3.5 42 14.53\nHolyoke 135,711 160,514 18.3 1,943 2,173 11.8 290 13.54\nHopedale 273,222 301,924 10.5 3,175 3,472 9.4 129 11.50Hopkinton 444,996 488,227 9.7 5,740 6,015 4.8 29 12.32Hubbardston 211,699 236,104 11.5 2,299 2,540 10.5 248 10.76Hudson 295,490 309,465 4.7 2,908 3,200 10.0 157 10.34\nHull 351,005 366,343 4.4 3,535 3,682 4.2 103 10.05\nHuntington 137,350 144,737 5.4 1,996 2,052 2.8 301 14.18Ipswich 418,780 435,378 4.0 3,995 4,071 1.9 81 9.35Kingston 313,525 328,685 4.8 3,433 3,704 7.9 101 11.27Lakeville 199,926 308,825 54.5 2,603 2,823 8.5 205 9.14\nLancaster 223,321 286,221 28.2 3,765 4,053 7.6 84 14.16\nLanesborough 144,555 172,628 19.4 2,718 2,831 4.2 202 16.40Lawrence 146,475 192,471 31.4 1,764 1,867 5.8 316 9.70Lee 154,449 180,041 16.6 2,431 2,542 4.6 247 14.12Leicester 157,072 215,666 37.3 2,080 2,264 8.8 280 10.50\nLenox 300,991 351,213 16.7 3,124 3,344 7.0 140 9.52\nLeominster 208,184 238,172 14.4 2,636 2,801 6.3 206 11.76Leverett 205,647 250,852 22.0 3,858 4,054 5.1 83 16.16Lexington 613,954 639,120 4.1 6,428 7,248 12.8 13 11.34Leyden 142,255 185,672 30.5 3,010 3,205 6.5 156 17.26\nLincoln 1,022,243 1,070,359 4.7 9,394 9,730 3.6 3 9.09\nLittleton 346,016 362,927 4.9 3,917 4,119 5.2 77 11.35Longmeadow 270,348 310,225 14.8 5,107 5,311 4.0 41 17.12Lowell 158,634 243,384 53.4 2,216 2,478 11.8 253 10.18Ludlow 142,160 183,882 29.3 2,633 2,751 4.5 213 14.96\nLunenburg 242,615 265,212 9.3 3,445 3,538 2.7 121 13.34\nLynn 229,060 256,992 12.2 2,618 2,616 -0.1 237 10.18Lynnfield 411,014 528,022 28.5 4,994 5,386 7.8 40 10.20Malden 294,521 314,781 6.9 2,624 2,735 4.2 217 8.69Manchester 900,182 922,358 2.5 6,535 7,139 9.2 14 7.74\nMansfield 261,688 385,467 47.3 4,190 4,533 8.2 59 11.76\nMarblehead 590,924 634,829 7.4 5,011 5,244 4.6 45 8.26Marion 454,499 552,539 21.6 4,345 4,404 1.4 66 7.97Marlborough*Marshfield 342,342 398,400 16.4 3,324 3,446 3.7 131 8.65\nMashpee 289,306 465,300 60.8 2,818 3,020 7.2 174 6.49\nMattapoisett 306,349 402,594 31.4 3,783 3,792 0.2 99 9.42Maynard 293,737 296,249 0.9 3,810 3,899 2.3 94 13.16Medfield 518,360 549,099 5.9 6,578 7,094 7.8 15 12.92Medford 334,499 348,500 4.2 3,171 3,286 3.6 146 9.43\nMedway 315,189 348,630 10.6 4,400 4,961 12.8 48 14.23\nMelrose 325,940 403,029 23.7 3,755 3,926 4.6 93 9.74Mendon 332,652 373,479 12.3 3,702 3,660 -1.1 105 9.80Merrimac 312,147 313,558 0.5 3,440 3,631 5.6 109 11.58Methuen 219,636 272,860 24.2 2,576 2,740 6.4 216 10.04 City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 5Table 1FY04 FY05 Pct. FY04 FY05 Pct. FY05 FY05\navg. avg. change avg. avg. change hi-lo tax\nMunicipality value value value tax bill tax bill bill ^rank^ rate\nMiddleborough 247,492 282,641 14.2 2,888 3,067 6.2 169 10.85\nMiddlefield 114,658 143,097 24.8 2,236 2,371 6.0 265 16.57Middleton 427,666 460,745 7.7 4,525 4,695 3.8 55 10.19Milford 272,036 289,429 6.4 3,248 3,424 5.4 132 11.83Millbury 175,337 228,240 30.2 2,634 2,643 0.3 234 11.58\nMillis 244,334 351,973 44.1 3,878 4,083 5.3 80 11.60\nMillville 192,789 271,069 40.6 2,971 3,069 3.3 168 11.32Milton 403,116 480,409 19.2 4,886 5,064 3.6 47 10.54Monroe 69,895 69,564 -0.5 1,136 1,106 -2.6 328 15.90Monson 162,214 184,954 14.0 2,591 2,406 -7.1 257 13.01\nMontague 135,697 152,404 12.3 2,341 2,295 -2.0 273 15.06\nMonterey 258,214 327,336 26.8 2,092 2,154 3.0 292 6.58Montgomery 180,234 193,537 7.4 2,383 2,555 7.2 245 13.20Mt. Washington 280,563 286,908 2.3 1,476 1,429 -3.2 324 4.98Nahant 469,343 521,766 11.2 3,961 4,101 3.5 79 7.86\nNantucket*\nNatick 403,904 405,943 0.5 4,108 4,303 4.7 68 10.60Needham 554,681 574,089 3.5 5,242 5,517 5.2 38 9.61New Ashford 133,993 165,314 23.4 1,264 1,276 0.9 327 7.72New Bedford 170,851 195,621 14.5 2,113 2,224 5.3 287 11.37\nNew Braintree 208,833 211,281 1.2 2,635 2,901 10.1 187 13.73\nNew Marlborough 291,640 293,141 0.5 2,041 2,116 3.7 294 7.22New Salem 157,729 173,365 9.9 2,208 2,257 2.2 281 13.02Newbury 389,594 416,897 7.0 3,358 3,523 4.9 123 8.45Newburyport 291,493 428,562 47.0 4,165 4,508 8.2 61 10.52\nNewton 669,688 743,345 11.0 6,831 7,047 3.2 16 9.48\nNorfolk 381,609 388,731 1.9 4,553 4,859 6.7 51 12.50N. Adams 99,215 112,625 13.5 1,318 1,376 4.4 326 12.22N. Andover 437,771 459,013 4.9 5,148 5,288 2.7 43 11.52N. Attleborough 222,385 331,525 49.1 2,853 3,080 8.0 165 9.29\nN. Brookfield 188,106 189,243 0.6 1,960 1,995 1.8 306 10.54\nN. Reading 366,655 438,647 19.6 4,290 4,878 13.7 50 11.12Northampton 220,271 239,587 8.8 2,947 3,079 4.5 166 12.85Northborough 355,505 367,221 3.3 4,902 4,891 -0.2 49 13.32Northbridge 194,213 284,893 46.7 2,567 2,581 0.5 242 9.06\nNorthfield 151,588 162,867 7.4 1,939 2,235 15.3 285 13.72\nNorton 258,619 304,202 17.6 3,083 3,261 5.8 147 10.72Norwell 422,269 540,543 28.0 5,566 5,730 2.9 34 10.60Norwood 290,977 357,995 23.0 2,799 2,961 5.8 182 8.27Oak Bluffs 472,469 541,542 14.6 3,227 3,287 1.9 145 6.07\nOakham 162,180 228,375 40.8 1,872 2,044 9.2 304 8.95\nOrange 105,214 139,689 32.8 1,909 1,985 4.0 307 14.21Orleans 639,418 679,982 6.3 2,820 2,985 5.9 180 4.39Otis 207,624 210,422 1.3 1,453 1,559 7.3 322 7.41Oxford 163,049 211,651 29.8 2,423 2,519 4.0 250 11.90\nPalmer 142,450 163,440 14.7 2,283 2,389 4.6 261 14.62\nPaxton 283,201 295,711 4.4 3,639 3,800 4.4 98 12.85Peabody 334,202 335,804 0.5 2,704 2,787 3.1 210 8.30Pelham 203,945 249,304 22.2 4,177 3,937 -5.7 92 15.79Pembroke 293,540 351,351 19.7 3,446 3,535 2.6 122 10.06\nPepperell 224,237 308,439 37.6 2,969 3,121 5.1 160 10.12\nPeru 108,128 129,008 19.3 2,054 2,064 0.5 299 16.00Petersham 223,465 224,949 0.7 2,939 3,100 5.5 163 13.78Phillipston 152,699 178,062 16.6 1,774 1,866 5.2 317 10.48Pittsfield 106,562 143,036 34.2 2,157 2,239 3.8 284 15.65\nPlainfield 132,004 174,040 31.8 1,980 2,269 14.6 279 13.04\nPlainville 253,239 306,781 21.1 3,323 3,620 8.9 112 11.80Plymouth 273,821 308,979 12.8 3,234 3,223 -0.3 151 10.43Plympton 260,680 353,844 35.7 4,160 4,430 6.5 65 12.52Princeton 299,497 326,713 9.1 3,807 4,064 6.8 82 12.44FY04 FY05 Pct. FY04 FY05 Pct. FY05 FY05\navg. avg. change avg. avg. change hi-lo tax\nMunicipality value value value tax bill tax bill bill ^rank^ rate\nTyringham 241,262 373,594 54.8 2,297 2,279 -0.8 276 6.10\nUpton 272,134 408,238 50.0 4,019 4,119 2.5 78 10.09Uxbridge 257,433 282,733 9.8 2,984 3,299 10.6 144 11.67Wakefield 281,175 392,008 39.4 3,205 3,552 10.8 120 9.06Wales 115,856 143,977 24.3 2,098 2,114 0.8 295 14.68\nWalpole 295,646 409,365 38.5 4,275 4,499 5.2 62 10.99\nWaltham*Ware 124,848 155,143 24.3 2,230 2,420 8.5 255 15.60Wareham 182,556 246,521 35.0 1,866 1,977 5.9 309 8.02Warren 129,308 169,029 30.7 2,351 2,490 5.9 251 14.73\nWarwick 122,272 122,294 0.0 2,450 2,536 3.5 249 20.74\nWashington 158,229 156,400 -1.2 1,997 2,093 4.8 297 13.38Watertown*Wayland 578,474 628,262 8.6 7,595 7,904 4.1 8 12.58Webster 184,634 228,296 23.6 1,822 1,975 8.4 310 8.65\nWellesley 855,156 900,444 5.3 7,320 7,564 3.3 11 8.40\nWellfleet 492,980 537,632 9.1 2,386 2,597 8.8 240 4.83Wenham 537,529 580,611 8.0 6,230 6,915 11.0 17 11.91W. Boylston 237,978 268,454 12.8 3,463 3,638 5.1 107 13.55W. Bridgewater 243,849 282,150 15.7 3,175 3,406 7.3 134 12.07\nW. Brookfield 152,619 208,191 36.4 2,157 2,346 8.8 268 11.27\nW. Newbury 498,115 512,097 2.8 4,822 5,208 8.0 46 10.17W. Springfield 138,102 183,204 32.7 2,556 2,836 11.0 200 15.48W. Stockbridge 261,485 266,096 1.8 3,595 3,949 9.8 91 14.84W. Tisbury 700,945 920,064 31.3 3,771 4,159 10.3 73 4.52\nWestborough 392,930 412,110 4.9 5,450 5,922 8.7 31 14.37\nWestfield 170,990 174,215 1.9 2,647 2,728 3.1 220 15.66Westford 385,413 416,940 8.2 5,396 5,704 5.7 35 13.68Westhampton 208,960 210,522 0.7 3,325 3,560 7.1 119 16.91Westminster 215,444 237,765 10.4 2,590 3,032 17.1 172 12.75\nWeston 1,162,135 1,243,898 7.0 11,238 11,767 4.7 1 9.46\nWestport 262,267 363,755 38.7 2,116 2,233 5.5 286 6.14Westwood 514,856 574,368 11.6 6,673 6,875 3.0 19 11.97Weymouth 212,236 319,494 50.5 2,693 2,828 5.0 204 8.85Whately 167,752 213,487 27.3 3,171 3,476 9.6 127 16.28\nWhitman 194,894 276,669 42.0 3,372 3,229 -4.2 150 11.67\nWilbraham 235,795 237,845 0.9 3,867 4,034 4.3 86 16.96Williamsburg 203,810 203,377 -0.2 3,194 3,352 4.9 138 16.48Williamstown 270,321 292,011 8.0 3,822 3,995 4.5 90 13.68Wilmington 322,046 348,545 8.2 3,108 3,405 9.6 135 9.77\nWinchendon 143,770 167,764 16.7 1,898 1,980 4.3 308 11.80\nWinchester 618,928 697,016 12.6 7,043 7,263 3.1 12 10.42Windsor 130,428 132,050 1.2 1,749 1,899 8.6 313 14.38Winthrop 301,862 355,747 17.9 3,157 3,209 1.6 154 9.02Woburn 305,107 333,115 9.2 2,709 3,051 12.6 170 9.16\nWorcester 180,193 211,038 17.1 2,658 2,781 4.6 212 13.18\nWorthington 142,650 188,165 31.9 2,512 2,559 1.9 244 13.60Wrentham 363,918 392,098 7.7 4,043 4,282 5.9 69 10.92Yarmouth 318,650 318,551 0.0 2,125 2,179 2.5 289 6.84\nState totals 307,361 352,911 14.8 3,412 3,589 5.2 10.17\n*Cities and towns with residential exemptions do not provide sufficient data for this\nanalysis.\n^This category ranks communities from high to low based on FY05 tax bills.\nHancock and Wendell had not set tax rates at the time of this analysis and are therefore\nexcluded from this table.FY04 FY05 Pct. FY04 FY05 Pct. FY05 FY05\navg. avg. change avg. avg. change hi-lo tax\nMunicipality value value value tax bill tax bill bill ^rank^ rate\nProvincetown 605,432 666,283 10.1 3,300 3,705 12.3 101 5.56\nQuincy 289,723 335,481 15.8 3,639 3,637 -0.1 108 10.84Randolph 252,481 292,536 15.9 2,797 2,867 2.5 193 9.80Raynham 286,550 308,881 7.8 2,771 3,166 14.3 159 10.25Reading 391,412 419,960 7.3 4,787 5,279 10.3 44 12.57\nRehoboth 301,320 341,718 13.4 2,914 3,028 3.9 173 8.86\nRevere 182,303 283,853 55.7 2,580 2,875 11.4 191 10.13Richmond 263,742 318,932 20.9 2,949 3,078 4.4 167 9.65Rochester 206,602 338,011 63.6 2,925 3,113 6.4 161 9.21Rockland 222,417 271,332 22.0 2,956 3,112 5.3 162 11.47\nRockport 459,570 493,806 7.4 4,035 4,242 5.1 71 8.59\nRowe 130,520 142,572 9.2 469 512 9.2 332 3.59Rowley 331,076 384,512 16.1 3,761 3,853 2.4 97 10.02Royalston 115,928 203,629 75.7 1,581 1,694 7.1 319 8.32Russell 144,688 157,715 9.0 2,209 2,271 2.8 277 14.40\nRutland 209,183 248,035 18.6 2,374 2,726 14.8 221 10.99\nSalem 291,487 315,270 8.2 3,413 3,588 5.1 115 11.38Salisbury 255,384 278,900 9.2 2,597 2,716 4.6 224 9.74Sandisfield 193,821 207,578 7.1 1,818 1,901 4.6 312 9.16Sandwich 323,007 374,699 16.0 3,295 3,575 8.5 118 9.54\nSaugus 300,652 340,237 13.2 2,595 2,838 9.4 199 8.34\nSavoy 113,676 129,597 14.0 1,655 1,709 3.3 318 13.19Scituate 404,046 437,869 8.4 4,040 4,151 2.7 74 9.48Seekonk 208,450 285,408 36.9 2,914 3,011 3.3 175 10.55Sharon 396,294 425,412 7.3 6,491 6,628 2.1 22 15.58\nSheffield 239,571 241,844 0.9 2,894 3,081 6.5 164 12.74\nShelburne 156,059 194,153 24.4 1,949 2,400 23.1 259 12.36Sherborn 636,434 666,814 4.8 9,591 9,889 3.1 2 14.83Shirley 234,919 260,099 10.7 2,788 2,866 2.8 194 11.02Shrewsbury 326,582 346,425 6.1 3,240 3,374 4.1 137 9.74\nShutesbury 161,199 201,398 24.9 3,417 3,686 7.9 102 18.30\nSomerset*Somerville*S. Hadley 188,732 189,912 0.6 2,710 2,796 3.2 207 14.72Southampton 189,769 207,408 9.3 2,879 2,922 1.5 184 14.09\nSouthborough 493,575 525,798 6.5 6,318 6,667 5.5 20 12.68\nSouthbridge 160,597 179,336 11.7 1,892 2,062 9.0 300 11.50Southwick 182,661 184,851 1.2 2,607 2,719 4.3 223 14.71Spencer 197,668 213,442 8.0 1,660 1,857 11.9 314 8.70Springfield 108,290 120,944 11.7 2,056 2,118 3.0 293 17.51\nSterling 286,029 298,124 4.2 3,604 3,885 7.8 95 13.03\nStockbridge 237,016 435,685 83.8 2,301 2,841 23.5 198 6.52Stoneham 315,884 383,534 21.4 3,841 4,012 4.5 89 10.46Stoughton 250,154 307,990 23.1 3,164 3,302 4.4 143 10.72Stow 388,311 423,035 8.9 5,685 6,075 6.9 27 14.36\nSturbridge 172,132 263,062 52.8 3,215 3,249 1.1 149 12.35\nSudbury 596,201 601,849 0.9 8,025 8,101 0.9 7 13.46Sunderland 181,723 225,541 24.1 2,682 3,250 21.2 148 14.41Sutton 248,182 312,091 25.8 3,058 3,208 4.9 155 10.28Swampscott 453,487 497,314 9.7 5,496 5,615 2.2 37 11.29\nSwansea 154,204 269,106 74.5 1,982 2,177 9.8 291 8.09\nTaunton 224,667 261,262 16.3 2,062 2,257 9.5 282 8.64Templeton 161,071 186,636 15.9 1,876 1,850 -1.4 315 9.91Tewksbury 302,507 331,007 9.4 3,143 3,343 6.4 141 10.10Tisbury*\nTolland 185,625 188,337 1.5 995 1,040 4.5 329 5.52\nTopsfield 487,405 527,573 8.2 5,946 6,363 7.0 25 12.06Townsend 211,934 237,700 12.2 2,982 3,214 7.8 153 13.52Truro 511,297 653,665 27.8 3,027 3,040 0.4 171 4.65Tyngsborough 307,983 339,539 10.2 3,911 4,024 2.9 88 11.85 City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 6\ncrease in the passage of Proposition 21⁄2\noverrides and capital exclusions. In\nFY04, communities passed overridesand capital exclusions that totaled$41.8 million. In FY05, the total was$30.5 million. This was the second yearin a row with such a decrease.\nDebt excluded under Proposition 2\n1⁄2\nincreased slightly in FY05. Statewide,\nthe amount of excluded debt only wentup from about $313.9 million in 2004 to$314.6 million in 2005. However, duringthe four year period from 2002 to 2005,the amount jumped by more than 17percent. Excluded debt service addsto the maximum allowable levy forcities and towns and therefore directlyimpacts the tax bill.\nCommunity Trends\nTable 1 shows the average single-family\ntax bill and average assessed value forall 338 communities in the study. It com-pares these figures to those of FY04and it ranks the communities from highto low for the FY05 tax bill.\nThe five communities with the highest\naverage tax bills in FY04 retained theirrankings in FY05. They are: Weston($11,767), Sherborn ($9,889), Lincoln($9,730), Carlisle ($9,224), and Dover($9,004). Not surprisingly, these townsalso all ranked among the highest withrespect to average assessed propertyvalue. The five communities with thelowest tax bills also remained un-changed: Rowe ($512), Erving ($908),Florida ($940), Tolland ($1,040), andMonroe ($1,106). These towns are allin the lower 20 percent of average as-sessed values. Statewide, the correla-tion between the average tax bill andaverage assessed value is generallystrong with a few exceptions. For ex-ample, communities on the Cape andIslands tend to have high assessedvalues but lower tax bills due to thelarge number of seasonal propertieswhose residents have a lower demandfor services. An even stronger correla-tion exists between average householdincome and average tax bill. All butFY05 Average Single-Family Tax Bills and Assessed Values continued from page three\n$4,000\n$3,500$3,000$2,500$2,000$1,500$1,000\n$ 500\n$0Amount\nFiscal yearActual dollarsAverage Single-Family Tax Bills \n1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Constant 1996 dollars$2,272\n$2,272\n$2,360\n$2,291\n$2,463\n$2,332\n$2,557\n$2,375\n$2,679\n$2,386\n$2,826\n$2,395\n$3,015\n$2,504\n$3,206\n$2,564\n$3.412\n$2,645\n$3.589\n$2,706\n$400\n$350$300$250$200$150$100\n$50\n$0Amount (in thousands)\nFiscal yearActual valueAverage Property Values \n1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Constant 1996 dollars$156,159\n$156,159\n$159,838\n$155,140\n$165,050\n$156,201\n$173,576\n$161,220\n$185,009\n$164,747\n$206,789\n$175,267\n$236,229\n$196,211\n$266,350\n$213,027\n$307,361\n$238,289\n$352,911\n$266,081\nFigures 2 and 3\ncontinued on page seven City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 7\nProcurement of\nBanking Services\nMassachusetts Office of the Inspector General\nThe Office of the Inspector General\n(OIG) has issued Banking Services\nProcurement Guide for Local Govern-\nment Treasurers to clarify the pro-\ncurement rules for obtaining bankingservices. The guide provides a briefoverview of M.G.L. Ch. 30B, providesrecommendations for banking serviceprocurement, and identifies resourcesfor local officials.\nThe Commonwealth’s cities and towns\nmay obtain a wide range of servicesfrom banking institutions including col-lection services, depository accountservices, disbursement services, creditservices and investment services.\nChapter 30B, the Uniform Procurement\nAct, establishes procedures that mostlocal government jurisdictions must fol-low for the acquisition and dispositionof supplies, equipment, services, andreal property.\nChapter 30B requires a competitive\nprocurement process using an Invita-tion for Bids or Request for Proposalsfor banking service contracts estimatedto cost $25,000 or more. For contractsestimated to cost less than $25,000,but more than $5,000, Chapter 30B re-quires three price quotations. Contracts\ncosting $5,000 or less must be enteredinto using sound business practices.\nThere are seven exemptions to Chapter\n30B that are relevant to municipal trea-surers. For example, banking servicesobtained under a compensating bal-ance agreement are governed byM.G.L. Ch. 44, Section 53F and there-fore exempt from Chapter 30B. The De-partment of Revenue, Division of LocalServices, Bureau of Accounts is respon-sible for the interpretation and enforce-ment of the compensating balance law.\nAdditionally, the issuance of bonds,\nnotes, or securities is exempt fromChapter 30B. The following servicescan safely be considered to be a partof a bond issuance: structuring of thematurity schedule; preparation of theofficial statement; verifying legal docu-ments; the acquisition of a credit rating;the obtaining of approval from govern-ment agencies; the advertisement ofthe proposed sale; the distribution ofthe official statement to potential bid-ders; and the filing of initial and annualdisclosure documents with federal andstate regulatory agencies.\nNumerous recommendations are pro-\nvided in the guide for jurisdictions tofollow for all banking service procure-ments and contracts. For example, theOIG recommends that all banking serv-\nices be procured competitively. Havingbanks compete over a municipality’sbusiness allows a treasurer to assesswhat is available and ensures that themunicipality is getting the best value.\nAdditionally, the need to re-procure\nservices prompts a review of the needfor those services and the quality of theservices currently being received.\nThis Office recommends that munici-\npalities \nalways enter into written agree-\nments or contracts for banking serv-ices. A written agreement, contract, orany written documentation between amunicipality and a bank can ensure thatthe municipality is fully complying withpublic records requirements as well asmeeting the responsibility of soundbusiness practices.\nFinally, the OIG recommends that trea-\nsurers consider the protection of thetaxpayer’s money. When taking a riskwith taxpayers’ money, it is imperativethat the risk be an educated one. There-fore, treasurers should conduct a thor-ough review of the qualifications, expe-rience, and expertise of any financial/investment advisor and/or consultant.\nFor a copy of this guide, please visit\nour website at www\n.mass.gov/ig . Ques-\ntions can be submitted by telephoneby calling 617-727-9140 or by mail. ■\none of the communities with the 50\nhighest tax bills have average incomesin the top 20 percent statewide.\nIn FY05, 11 communities experienced\nincreases in their average tax bills thatwere greater than 15 percent (rangingfrom 15.3 percent to 28.1 percent). Allbut one of these communities also sawtheir average assessed values increaseby at least 10 percent. Four of theeleven successfully passed Proposition2\n1⁄2overrides.\nWhile all but five communities across\nthe state experienced increases in theaverage assessed value, the magni-tude of the changes varied dramaticallyin 2005. There were 64 cities and towns\nin which the average value increasedby less than 5 percent. However, of the148 communities that had increasesabove the statewide average (14.8 per-cent), 56 communities had increasesgreater than 30 percent. Of these, 15were greater than 50 percent. Swansea,Royalston, and Stockbridge each ex-perienced increases above 70 percent.\nFurther analysis of the average as-\nsessed values show a correlation toDLS’ community recertification sched-ule. All but six of the 56 communitieswith value increases over 30 percentjust completed a triennial recertificationin 2005. Only one of the 64 communi-\nties with increases under 5 percent hada recertification in 2005. Of the citiesand towns below the statewide increaseaverage, 82 percent were also non-certification communities. These figuresreflect the fact that leading up to 2005,several communities were not yet per-forming interim year adjustments to val-ues. Now that interim year adjustmentsare required for all communities, suchsudden and uneven jumps in averageassessed value should not occur asfrequently. ■\nFY05 Average Single-Family Tax Bills and Assessed Values continued from page six City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 8\nincome units, or the municipality may\nshow that it has an affordable housingplan approved by the Department ofHousing and Community Developmentand the municipality has met the yearlyminimal requirements for compliancewith that plan.\nEither party may also submit a motion\nfor summary decision at any time priorto the conclusion of the formal hearingproceedings. This may be done with orwithout supporting affidavits or memo-randum of law. The motion may requestthat the hearing officer decide all oronly part of the issues in dispute. Theamount of time necessary for the HACto render a decision on summary deci-sion varies based on the nature andnumber of arguments presented andwhether the decision will be dispositiveof the entire appeal, which might requirereview and a vote by the full Committee.\nThe Use of Prefiled Direct Testimony\nIn addition to the use of the motionspractice, prefiled testimony reducesthe amount of time needed for disposi-tion of an appeal by limiting the hear-ing to cross-examination on the issuesestablished as part of the prefiled testi-mony. However, this procedure is notnecessarily appropriate for all cases.Occasionally the presiding officer maydetermine that it is more appropriate torequire that all of the testimony in a par-ticular case be oral testimony. Dead-lines for prefiled testimony are estab-lished by HAC Standing Order No.04-02, which directs that the prefiledtestimony of both parties be completedwithin 16 weeks from the date of theprehearing conference. Witnesses\nwhose testimony is prefiled will be re-quired to appear for cross-examinationduring the hearing, unless the partiesagree otherwise. All cross-examinationwill now normally be completed on con-secutive days, which will also aid in ex-pediting the hearing process. In con-junction with the prefiled testimony, aparty may make a motion for directeddecision in its favor after the submissionof prefiled testimony, on the groundsthat upon the facts or the law the non-moving party has failed to prove a ma-terial element of its case or defense.\nPromoting Affordable Housing\nSince its enactment, the Comprehen-sive Permit Law has been an effectivemeans by which to ensure the contin-ued construction of affordable housing.It has been estimated that this law hasresulted in the development of morethan 30,000 housing units in approxi-mately 200 Massachusetts cities andtowns. The changes in procedure dis-cussed herein have resulted both in adecrease in the amount of time neededto resolve an appeal and also appearto be promoting the resolution of casesthrough voluntary settlement. Municipal-ities can access Recent Decisions bythe HAC, as well as review its Regula-tions, Standing Orders and Guidelinesfor Local Review of ComprehensivePermits at www\n.mass.gov/dhcd/com\nponents/hac . ■\nGlenna Sheveland is an associate with Petrini &\nAssociates, P .C., in Framingham, and formerlywas Counsel to the Housing Appeals Committee.Ch.150E, Sec. 7(d) as a provision su-\nperceded by a conflicting provision of acollective bargaining agreement, sec-tion 7(d) listed only statutes specificallydealing with terms and conditions ofemployment, which are the only suchprovisions intended to be supercededby such an agreement. M.G.L. Ch. 59,Sec. 21C(m) is not a statute dealingwith terms and conditions of employ-ment, but is a provision intended to au-thorize appropriations contingent on aballot vote to override the tax levy limitsimposed by law. The town cited severalcases that said the labor relations com-mission would not dictate the fundingsource of an appropriation request, butin all the cases the commission had re-quired the towns to submit a full fund-ing request.\nThe dissent emphasized that contingent\nappropriations had become a regulartool in the budgeting process and thatit could be harmonized with chapter150E. Justice Sosman pointed out thatmany appropriations required stepsfrom other parties before they might befinalized, and a Proposition 2\n1⁄2contin-\ngent request was merely one such ap-propriation. The dissent further sug-gested that eliminating this provisionmight make more executive officers re-luctant to agree to minimum staffingprovisions in the future. It pointed outthat in this case there was no claimthat the executive officers did not fullysupport the appropriation and theoverride vote.\nFinally, while the case does require the\nexecutive officers to place a non-con-tingent article on the warrant to fund aminimum staffing provision, it did notrequire the town meeting to take a non-contingent vote. The finance committeestill appears free to move that the votebe made contingent on passage of anoverride, as well as any town citizen,and town meeting could so vote. ■HAC Appeals continued from page one Legal continued from page two Municipal Job Duties Online\nThe Division of Local Services’ (DLS)\nTechnical Assistance Section has pub-lished a list of the legal duties andresponsibilities of the accountant, trea-surer, collector and the assessing de-partment on the DLS website (www.mass.gov/dls). This information on “JobResponsibilities” is listed under theheading “Financial Management As-sistance.” The direct link is www\n.mass.\ngov/dls/mdmstuf/T echnical_Assist\nance/Jobs/jobs_index.htm .\nThe duties and responsibilities of mu-\nnicipal finance officers, as well as ap-pointed or elected boards, are rooted instate law and regulations. Explanationsand guidelines are also included in op-erations manuals published by the var-ious professional organizations, oftentimes in collaboration with DLS.\nThis section summarizes, and provides\nlinks to the legal citations of, funda-mental job responsibilities for financialofficers that are critical to sound finan-cial management practices.\nIn addition to Job Responsibilities,\nother sections under Financial Man-agement Assistance include BestPractices, Restructuring City and TownGovernment, and Benchmarks andSpreadsheets. This site also includeslinks to the Open Meeting Law Guide-lines, the School Building Authority, theMassachusetts General Laws and var-ious DLS publications. ■City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 9\nGraziano and Sandell Earn\nDesignation\nDeputy Commissioner Gerard D. Perry\nhas announced that Joanne Grazianoand Grace Sandell of the Bureau ofLocal Assessment have earned the In-ternational Association of AssessingOfficers’ (IAAO) designation of Assess-ment Administration Specialist (AAS).\nJoanne is the Bureau’s certification su-\npervisor and Grace is a certificationadvisor.\nAccording to the IAAO, “[T]he purpose\nof the AAS designation is to recognizeprofessionalism and competency in ad-ministration of a variety of functions forproperty tax purposes.”\nTo qualify for the AAS designation can-\ndidates must fulfill certain requirements,such as successful completion of sev-eral IAAO courses, an assessment ad-ministration case study examination,and have at least three years’ experi-ence in the assessment field. The can-didate must also pass a four-hour AASmaster examination.\nMarilyn H. Browne, chief of the Bureau\nof Local Assessment, said, “Joanneand Grace’s most recent achievementexemplify their professionalism andsteadfast search for knowledge in theappraisal and assessment administra-tion fields. They are to be commended.”\nJoanne has worked for the Division of\nLocal Services for four years and su-pervises a staff of 10 appraisal certifi-cation advisors who work in the Bostonand regional offices. Grace has workedfor the Division for almost seven years.She works with assessors in 34 com-munities located on the South Shore,Cape Cod and Nantucket.Schedule A Reminder\nSchedule A is a detailed statement ofrevenues and expenditures that citiesand towns must prepare and submit tothe Department of Revenue each fiscalyear no later than October 31. Town ac-countants and city auditors usually areresponsible for completing ScheduleA. This information is added to the Di-vision of Local Services’ (DLS) Munici-pal Data Bank, and is used by manystate agencies and the Legislature forresearch and analysis of various pro-grams. DLS also provides Schedule Adata to the U.S. Census Bureau for useby federal agencies.\nSection 3 of the state budget autho-\nrizes the Commissioner of Revenue todelay payment of state aid to citiesand towns that miss the filing deadline.In January and May 2005, DLS sent re-minders to several communities advis-ing them to submit these reports orface a delay in receiving local aid pay-ments. Some communities compliedwith this notice. Others experienceddelays in receiving their third and fourthquarter state aid payments becausethey still had not submitted Schedule A.\nDeputy Commissioner Gerard D. Perry\nis urging cities and towns to makeevery effort to comply with the Sched-ule A filing deadline. If your communityexperiences any problem with filing theSchedule A, your Bureau of Accountsfield representative is available to offerassistance or answer questions regard-ing this matter.DLS Update City & Town September 2005 Division of Local Services 10\nDLS Profile: Executive Director, Springfield\nFinance Control Board\nIn July 2004 the governor and the state Legislature\nestablished a Finance Control Board to oversee theoperations of the City of Springfield. What was esti-mated at that time to be a budget deficit of $22 mil-lion for FY05 was discovered, after the initial reviewof the city’s financial accounts, to be $41 million.\nWith 13 years of senior executive experience, Philip\nPuccia was hired by the control board in August\n2004 to turn around Springfield’s fortunes. Beforecoming to the control board, Phil spent two years asvice president of operations and general manager ofa smart card company. He was also the managingdirector of a consulting and investment banking prac-tice that focused on transportation. In the 1990s, heworked in various management positions for theCommonwealth in the Highway Department, Execu-tive Office of Transportation and Massachusetts BayTransportation Authority (MBTA).\nIn an interview in \nBusinessWest (available online at www .businesswest.com/\narch3.05a/index.html ), Puccia compared the fiscal crisis in Springfield to the prob-\nlems he faced at the MBTA. “When I arrived at the MBTA…[t]here was a $40 millionbudget deficit….What you found was …a management culture that didn’t focuson performance and accountability. And no one paid attention to the bottom line.”\nPuccia went on to say that turning around Springfield’s fortunes involves more than\ncutting expenses and raising revenues. “It is also seeking something that has beenmissing from the equation of Springfield’s municipal operations — accountability.”However, over the past year, Puccia said that the control board has taken a numberof steps to reduce health care costs and day-to-day spending. Also, the controlboard is working to promote accountability and efficiency by reorganizing thestructure of the city’s government.\nIn his FY06 budget message, Puccia said “we still have far to go.” The FY06 pro-\nvisional budget, without the inclusion of employee raises, projects a deficit of ap-proximately $6.5 million.\nWhile Puccia emphasizes that there is still a lot of hard work to do, he said that he\nenjoys a close working relationship with Mayor Charles Ryan and his senior staff.“That relationship has served us well in meeting the challenges that we have hadto face over the past year.”\nRevenue Commissioner Alan LeBovidge, who is the chairman of the Springfield\nFinance Control Board, said that, “Phil is really doing a great job in Springfield.He is like a juggler. We are moving on so many fronts out there, trying to improveservices for the citizens of Springfield and trying to close the budget gap. Phil isjuggling many issues at the same time.”\nPhil lives with his family in Andover. He holds a bachelor’s degree in political sci-\nence from Fordham University and a master’s degree in business administrationfrom the University of Massachusetts. ■Philip PucciaState Revenues\nEclipse Expectationsby $436 Million in FY05\nRevenue Commissioner Alan LeBov-\nidge announced that preliminary rev-enue collections for FY05 were $17.086billion, an increase of $1.133 billion or7.1 percent over FY04. Total tax collec-tions for FY05 exceeded the revisedyearly benchmark by $436 million. Itwas the first time the Department ofRevenue had collected $17 billion in afiscal year\n“All tax types had improved collections\nin FY05,” LeBovidge said. “Only salesand use tax fell below the yearly esti-mate and that was due to a one-timeaccounting adjustment of $18 million.Income tax collections accounted formuch of the increase versus thebenchmark.”\nIncome tax collections for FY05 totaled\n$9.690 billion, an increase of $860 mil-lion or 9.7 percent over FY04. With-holding tax collections totaled $7.674billion, an increase of $306 million or4.1 percent. Sales and use tax collec-tions were $3.886 billion, up $137 mil-lion or 3.7 percent. Corporate andbusiness tax collections totaled $1.706billion, an increase of $31 million or 1.8percent. ■\nCity&Town\nCity &Town is published by the Massachusetts Depart-ment of Revenue’s Division of Local Services (DLS) and is designed to address matters of interest to localofficials.\nJoan E. Grourke,\nEditor\nTo obtain information or publications, contact the\nDivision of Local Services via:• website: www.mass.gov/dls• telephone: (617) 626-2300• mail: PO Box 9569, Boston, MA 02114-9569" }

[ -0.11264941841363907, 0.030697837471961975, -0.07891765236854553, -0.04293835535645485, -0.05913061648607254, 0.02622522972524166, 0.045970652252435684, 0.01893765665590763, 0.01687733829021454, 0.028867138549685478, 0.0049938843585550785, -0.002576560713350773, 0.03951985388994217, -0.04492373764514923, -0.07553621381521225, -0.02122533693909645, -0.03676818311214447, -0.016344696283340454, -0.0012307344004511833, 0.005135020706802607, -0.017165247350931168, 0.08381977677345276, 0.020979860797524452, 0.004226734396070242, -0.020880483090877533, -0.00527150696143508, -0.09201860427856445, -0.019325952976942062, 0.04679030552506447, 0.01904812827706337, 0.046170298010110855, 0.040889982134103775, 0.0027071847580373287, 0.001213727635331452, 0.06316371262073517, -0.03680440038442612, -0.07764042168855667, 0.06258343905210495, -0.05971713736653328, 0.037346579134464264, 0.014945337548851967, -0.029156729578971863, 0.0011337784817442298, 0.037515006959438324, -0.04453296214342117, 0.044782839715480804, -0.05118211731314659, 0.009130645543336868, -0.05631614848971367, 0.13543902337551117, -0.043781112879514694, -0.0018936003325507045, 0.02945832349359989, 0.14411616325378418, -0.04079960659146309, -0.041440561413764954, 0.07667361944913864, 0.007716402877122164, -0.11815687268972397, -0.044652603566646576, -0.08357309550046921, -0.020222846418619156, 0.02835138700902462, 0.009508347138762474, -0.04261858016252518, 0.11460930109024048, -0.017126649618148804, -0.03220861405134201, -0.03705836459994316, -0.07422245293855667, -0.021588312461972237, -0.06877180933952332, -0.03493047505617142, 0.06688932329416275, -0.004768924787640572, 0.05410030111670494, 0.008315691724419594, 0.04758331924676895, 0.04163913056254387, -0.09736461192369461, 0.06636635959148407, -0.0450013130903244, 0.039594609290361404, 0.02602270431816578, 0.02048531360924244, -0.04261336475610733, -0.07289869338274002, -0.0314641147851944, 0.06690728664398193, -0.04315374791622162, 0.14727158844470978, 0.04197699949145317, 0.003960317466408014, -0.08595863729715347, 0.05715203285217285, -0.07120653986930847, -0.00202518911100924, 0.09115033596754074, 0.008240797556936741, 0.00428601773455739, -0.0425475649535656, -0.05438593029975891, 0.02015688456594944, 0.019650312140583992, -0.03578134998679161, -0.06467076390981674, 0.09035495668649673, 0.020381711423397064, 0.06034546718001366, -0.04919120669364929, 0.061295036226511, 0.02512788027524948, 0.06296094506978989, -0.01949433423578739, 0.06912031769752502, -0.009021518751978874, -0.0591389536857605, 0.035233281552791595, 0.03230495750904083, -0.03675880655646324, 0.029285674914717674, 0.001769866095855832, -0.07175847887992859, -0.04401456564664841, -0.023223914206027985, -0.021025221794843674, 0.029194828122854233, 9.417175444605204e-33, 0.09488058090209961, 0.045125946402549744, 0.0057679349556565285, -0.0035023896489292383, 0.025891896337270737, 0.02279350720345974, 0.01458825170993805, 0.0280079897493124, 0.029715383425354958, -0.020275995135307312, -0.10665487498044968, 0.03920911252498627, -0.013476601801812649, -0.08660474419593811, -0.088936448097229, -0.01753203012049198, -0.013820366933941841, 0.06338781863451004, -0.029808582738041878, 0.14534838497638702, 0.033390194177627563, -0.04680024832487106, 0.005571766756474972, 0.004867638926953077, 0.006628646515309811, 0.09136248379945755, -0.05112049728631973, 0.0014063708949834108, 0.0487159825861454, -0.02952352538704872, 0.037261221557855606, 0.01896529458463192, 0.01893816702067852, -0.04289033263921738, 0.046088870614767075, 0.001367064076475799, -0.06352725625038147, -0.004021311644464731, -0.0062574949115514755, -0.02862246334552765, 0.03667426109313965, 0.03980167582631111, 0.053622256964445114, 0.022229427471756935, -0.009156945161521435, -0.012275167740881443, 0.06582578271627426, 0.032636187970638275, 0.0415237657725811, 0.05937878414988518, -0.00706946337595582, 0.024834273383021355, -0.1516045480966568, -0.020821992307901382, -0.0030086501501500607, 0.022205380722880363, -0.00015006780449766666, 0.05328751727938652, 0.07136528193950653, 0.026610177010297775, 0.05129655450582504, 0.024096280336380005, -0.010557683184742928, -0.03926492854952812, 0.005772774573415518, -0.054047469049692154, -0.016250038519501686, -0.08543964475393295, 0.001279898569919169, -0.02323746867477894, 0.026750799268484116, 0.009812796488404274, 0.0034154881723225117, 0.044985443353652954, 0.03237470984458923, -0.028381215408444405, 0.0836997777223587, 0.06039992719888687, -0.05262480303645134, -0.038461990654468536, -0.05292430892586708, -0.04990565776824951, -0.0055724880658090115, 0.05676842853426933, -0.05479013919830322, 0.03667763993144035, 0.06202829256653786, -0.035367731004953384, -0.08291704952716827, -0.03556517884135246, 0.020277250558137894, -0.01518542505800724, -0.02707572840154171, 0.07721397280693054, -0.006320683751255274, -9.204855450907775e-33, -0.044858820736408234, -0.06396433711051941, -0.01704767532646656, -0.030014004558324814, -0.04565149545669556, -0.0014971784548833966, 0.0168853048235178, -0.08095359057188034, 0.06435231119394302, -0.04426899552345276, 0.08106536418199539, 0.0018142589833587408, 0.010758385062217712, -0.026034120470285416, -0.0002011616452364251, 0.004888678435236216, -0.01929912343621254, -0.04189147427678108, -0.06588311493396759, 0.021736979484558105, 0.041619379073381424, 0.0797957330942154, 0.004332834854722023, 0.08079009503126144, -0.012785852886736393, 0.11097082495689392, -0.01628144644200802, 0.0036121150478720665, 0.0634746104478836, -0.013283210806548595, -0.08660276979207993, -0.0349062979221344, -0.04031969979405403, 0.037748292088508606, -0.08701863139867783, -0.07272336632013321, 0.02396468073129654, 0.01379392109811306, -0.018964333459734917, 0.01526060700416565, 0.03574790805578232, 0.009384236298501492, -0.028826145455241203, 0.046783700585365295, 0.0014547172468155622, -0.09762686491012573, -0.042696867138147354, 0.00864785723388195, 0.04121437296271324, 0.0004895325982943177, -0.017708037048578262, -0.01076445821672678, 0.023803045973181725, 0.03184085339307785, -0.03457501158118248, 0.06407763063907623, 0.047354161739349365, -0.08725179731845856, -0.03291523456573486, -0.09265110641717911, 0.06876137852668762, 0.060599129647016525, -0.08695989102125168, 0.041483353823423386, -0.019494526088237762, -0.032359249889850616, 0.043227359652519226, -0.06540249288082123, 0.06448505818843842, 0.0032340988982468843, -0.046786610037088394, -0.11110339313745499, 0.06478791683912277, -0.0645950511097908, 0.07834408432245255, -0.008972516283392906, -0.020214997231960297, -0.03947557136416435, -0.09145885705947876, -0.007192141842097044, -0.057955339550971985, 0.01290413923561573, 0.017117708921432495, 0.019607113674283028, -0.07859138399362564, -0.04537665843963623, 0.10695985704660416, -0.08389073610305786, -0.014504756778478622, 0.017757324501872063, -0.0431467667222023, -0.03100084327161312, -0.03796437382698059, 0.013938027434051037, -0.07459262758493423, -6.173961963895636e-8, -0.026447424665093422, -0.03339960798621178, 0.004907594993710518, -0.01640358380973339, 0.04285185784101486, -0.124732106924057, -0.03224688395857811, 0.03638657182455063, -0.05512590333819389, 0.039289552718400955, 0.06534838676452637, 0.037029266357421875, -0.07217693328857422, -0.08111632615327835, 0.06471458077430725, 0.00584433926269412, -0.09821344912052155, -0.08100854605436325, -0.05008448660373688, 0.04266684129834175, -0.06454344838857651, -0.03069920279085636, -0.04448869079351425, -0.026236314326524734, 0.020220723003149033, 0.0675559937953949, -0.015893656760454178, 0.08459381759166718, 0.0787702426314354, -0.035871703177690506, -0.009017950855195522, 0.03326497972011566, 0.09303244948387146, 0.020671751350164413, 0.017031820490956306, -0.019494211301207542, 0.02004086971282959, 0.0470212958753109, 0.011861691251397133, 0.008337798528373241, 0.003943095915019512, 0.02917095273733139, 0.03367625176906586, 0.08855001628398895, 0.024174092337489128, -0.054136984050273895, -0.11771690845489502, -0.04260874539613724, 0.05463676154613495, -0.08557697385549545, 0.05168629810214043, -0.0055213188752532005, 0.07370713353157043, 0.07712272554636002, -0.06581918895244598, -0.004260469228029251, 0.05510759353637695, 0.031427111476659775, -0.051339101046323776, 0.002079012803733349, 0.034173399209976196, -0.05700302869081497, 0.007885017432272434, -0.06431467086076736 ]

{ "pdf_file": "6RWOLVNDX4CTI4PAGDGMWC3FFBTVW3TK.pdf", "text": ".- \n.= \nMR AGENCY USE - \nWleatlM bte \nJune 24, 1976 \nWiation Number \nDHR- 74 \nb INSTRUCTIONS: See Publication No. 76-RM-1 for instructions on completini this form. Forward signed original to \nDepartment of Archives and Hisrow, Records Management Division, 330 Capitol Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia, 30334. \nAttention: Scheduling Section. \n1. Agency Addtur FOR RECORDS WNAGEMENt USE \nApplication Number Department of Human Resources \nDivision of Administration \nPatient Accounts Unit \nAt1 an ta , Georgia 76-23-0 \n47 Trinity Avenue, Rm. 318-H bm Received bm COIllQleT JUN 2 8 1976 - 6 $776 \n8. -04 Swiss \n&lien Latest \n1972 I Present \n“he Patient Accounts Unit is responsible for actively investigating each patient’s ability \n10 pay upon entering any State hospital; applies and collects for cost of care from hospital. \n”his office also received Medicare insurance, Medicaid checks, personal net income or other \n,enefits and applies them to individual accounts, checking to be sure there is no overpayment 5. Rreords Serier Tide Ifoilowed by tfde used in office; if different1 \nPatient Accounts Patient Payment Summary Files ’ \n?. Record S.rh Demiption This file contains the following documents (include fm numbersand tirles, if anyl: \nAttach samples of the file. \nOocumentsrelating to: - - . .- -‘ ~ _- - - -LJ identifying payments made by patient \nincome sources to DHR . \nlndu&jwed listings identifying hospital #, patient account #, payee code, patient name, \npayee name, deposit date and amount of payment. l?Wpr/ \nFile is arranged: chronologically by year thereunder by month, thereunder alphabegically by ‘-,. \n’> -- patient’s name. > -. - \n3. Monthly Rderena Rate How often are records referred to which are: \n5 ; Thirteen to twentydour months old 5 One to Jix months old \ntwenty-five months and older ? 10 ; Seven to twelve months old \n*__ - \n; Other ispecifyl 1 3. Annul( Rate of Accumulation ot R.Q& \nLO~WJM drawers : Lega14ze drawers ; Shelves e. When one orwo documents in the file make it necessary to keep the entire file for a long pariod. could these \n11. Ratantlon Raquinments The following requims the ssrh to !a kept: \nI StatrLw YWI d. Audit priod years. \nb. Strnm of limitation years. e. Adminirtntiw need 7 Years \nc Fdarat law pars. f. Federal ratention instructions 3 years. \nAttach eopy or exwt of law or reguletionr. Explain administrative need. \nBased on previous reference experience, Patient Accounts need files for a 7 year period. \n‘f __ 12 &proved Ohpodtion lnmuaions This agency recommends that the file Mias be cut off at the end of each: \n0 Calendar Year: 0 Fiscal Year: 0 Other - \nthen, \n0 Hold in the current file area month(r) war($); then \n0 Transfar to local holding area; hold \n0 Transfer to State Rear& Canter: hold \n0 Trader to Staa Archives for parmanem ratention. yeads); then \nyeadd: then \n0 htrov. \n0 otha IsPecifYj - \nMonthly Patient Payment Summary - Destroy upon receipt and verification \nof next nwnthly report. \nAnnual Patient Payment Summary - Cut-off file at the end of the fiscal \nyear, hold in current files area for \n2 years; then transfer to the &ate \nRecords Center, hold 5 years; then destroy. \n,/ \nThasa inrtructionc apply to all prior and future accumulations of the series. \nStat. Records Committer ISignatum) Date \nlecommndationa in para- \nraph 12 are approved. \nrf dirapprovcd, mad, lettpr \nf explanation.) \n. " }

[ -0.10273253917694092, 0.04914578050374985, -0.05938480421900749, 0.04783175513148308, 0.13075092434883118, 0.11930633336305618, 0.05227113142609596, -0.10346704721450806, -0.029319148510694504, 0.02018844522535801, -0.015318939462304115, 0.04907362908124924, 0.04766721650958061, 0.014876699075102806, 0.018972273916006088, 0.026566045358777046, 0.019749809056520462, 0.029297837987542152, -0.07286475598812103, -0.07207512110471725, -0.024308951571583748, 0.005032595247030258, -0.050358373671770096, 0.029367342591285706, -0.0031304366420954466, -0.06778176873922348, -0.05676327645778656, -0.018580324947834015, -0.035425975918769836, -0.02306128479540348, -0.030851630493998528, 0.012108979746699333, -0.01507739257067442, 0.027927974238991737, 0.0249345526099205, 0.030931340530514717, 0.034066930413246155, -0.01592262275516987, -0.08438576757907867, -0.08377803862094879, -0.059176113456487656, -0.06774644553661346, -0.007549530826508999, -0.053679682314395905, -0.07644645869731903, 0.011633552610874176, 0.08190084248781204, -0.04831395670771599, -0.04135467857122421, -0.009882602840662003, 0.072540283203125, 0.047296345233917236, -0.0246512982994318, 0.028999168425798416, 0.00248529389500618, -0.010622902773320675, -0.0732731819152832, -0.15431107580661774, -0.0013613210758194327, -0.004388789180666208, -0.05541473627090454, -0.1402008831501007, 0.004339922685176134, 0.010988915339112282, -0.006045673508197069, -0.0006276660715229809, -0.03373704105615616, -0.06355039030313492, -0.066767118871212, -0.08339252322912216, -0.03888190537691116, -0.05754220858216286, 0.0875619575381279, -0.04550452157855034, 0.1282624453306198, -0.01766720414161682, 0.05643743276596069, 0.011477002874016762, 0.07956811040639877, -0.018272677436470985, 0.02589108981192112, 0.024811971932649612, -0.005628632381558418, 0.06441007554531097, -0.04556678608059883, 0.0006923610344529152, -0.03047064319252968, 0.0475536473095417, 0.055581994354724884, 0.0022274137008935213, 0.028501087799668312, 0.010449527762830257, 0.0453159436583519, -0.06556783616542816, 0.022090520709753036, -0.13994301855564117, 0.025680573657155037, 0.06431545317173004, -0.032367248088121414, 0.02878667041659355, 0.009379017166793346, -0.0008366491529159248, 0.0011276908917352557, -0.005052506923675537, 0.03822627291083336, -0.031128834933042526, 0.0013462965143844485, 0.053673211485147476, -0.017266463488340378, 0.06675603240728378, 0.06480318307876587, 0.09483855217695236, -0.060327619314193726, 0.04885954037308693, -0.05146804079413414, 0.017019538208842278, -0.049242518842220306, -0.024321619421243668, -0.006789360195398331, 0.03967184200882912, -0.016221337020397186, 0.10347367078065872, -0.05445278435945511, -0.08771511912345886, -0.05172496289014816, 0.006810647435486317, -0.04911364987492561, -3.702683778183369e-33, -0.004164631944149733, 0.1050386130809784, 0.06208715960383415, -0.027353966608643532, 0.07261287420988083, 0.03095121681690216, -0.029251012951135635, 0.01333681307733059, 0.03343559056520462, 0.019449636340141296, -0.014756527729332447, 0.12283047288656235, 0.1190318614244461, 0.005477919243276119, -0.012752877548336983, -0.0353812575340271, -0.0780097171664238, -0.0025307643227279186, 0.028134837746620178, -0.002009335672482848, 0.06777768582105637, 0.025297239422798157, -0.015441358089447021, 0.03367774188518524, -0.0007612963672727346, -0.06938500702381134, -0.0261525958776474, -0.09603492170572281, -0.01806837134063244, 0.0589764229953289, 0.00665391655638814, 0.012347958981990814, 0.037214312702417374, -0.025880973786115646, 0.004403816536068916, 0.010374176315963268, -0.005525545217096806, 0.02047584019601345, 0.009268795140087605, -0.10827482491731644, -0.016464104875922203, -0.00936177745461464, 0.09065019339323044, 0.0062634763307869434, -0.034853093326091766, 0.015156914480030537, 0.055266112089157104, 0.007616399321705103, 0.011716869659721851, 0.07880373299121857, 0.026059791445732117, 0.03249510005116463, 0.022914834320545197, -0.06485867500305176, -0.035250384360551834, 0.014566930010914803, -0.009235971607267857, 0.020298412069678307, -0.057282306253910065, -0.07277697324752808, -0.06938019394874573, 0.016476543620228767, -0.041735995560884476, -0.003911489620804787, -0.04267556220293045, 0.05171552300453186, -0.03954726457595825, -0.028360631316900253, 0.007373673841357231, 0.005169366952031851, 0.05279121547937393, 0.05789904296398163, 0.0834243968129158, -0.0301172137260437, -0.0857798233628273, 0.08563961088657379, 0.0509883351624012, 0.022308727726340294, -0.019045399501919746, -0.03599122166633606, -0.05794256925582886, 0.06057346239686012, 0.10830526798963547, -0.06891113519668579, 0.060255035758018494, -0.07950009405612946, -0.03599504008889198, 0.01814231462776661, 0.09251397848129272, -0.0654841810464859, 0.03789843991398811, -0.04830170050263405, 0.025733070448040962, 0.024683348834514618, -0.01766902208328247, 1.0471268779636397e-33, -0.005883133038878441, -0.029002724215388298, -0.03314775973558426, 0.01553849782794714, 0.1265621930360794, -0.06933271884918213, 0.0532972626388073, -0.03459463641047478, 0.06030105799436569, 0.022261224687099457, 0.03597700223326683, 0.023853696882724762, -0.03366026654839516, 0.03108190931379795, 0.034919921308755875, -0.04390867426991463, -0.06834578514099121, -0.021229010075330734, -0.026802241802215576, 0.03649882972240448, -0.022342674434185028, 0.07880839705467224, 0.06128576025366783, 0.02126605249941349, 0.06900513917207718, 0.036088909953832626, 0.019907046109437943, -0.07251182198524475, 0.08192241936922073, 0.05309327691793442, -0.058937691152095795, 0.029805611819028854, -0.0726301372051239, 0.022536614909768105, 0.005495403427630663, -0.08501293510198593, -0.046843454241752625, 0.006285028997808695, 0.012618763372302055, -0.009175294078886509, 0.013940094970166683, -0.00249765464104712, -0.028193792328238487, 0.05186515301465988, -0.027798078954219818, 0.0007428117096424103, 0.026881065219640732, -0.05983416736125946, 0.021187743172049522, 0.0226743146777153, -0.07363356649875641, -0.0226608719676733, 0.052615124732255936, 0.02659761719405651, -0.033690717071294785, 0.0450868159532547, 0.012241884134709835, -0.04725939407944679, -0.027530567720532417, 0.05748661234974861, 0.029785409569740295, 0.07842531055212021, -0.05888310819864273, 0.11773333698511124, 0.04611054062843323, -0.027484456077218056, -0.020897429436445236, -0.09952027350664139, 0.020463675260543823, -0.028065543621778488, 0.03618839383125305, -0.04056932032108307, 0.003029359271749854, -0.06322944909334183, -0.020882830023765564, 0.04452166706323624, 0.019091857597231865, 0.024963613599538803, -0.09993665665388107, 0.0011359519558027387, 0.026844536885619164, -0.04442150518298149, 0.014174606651067734, 0.02577779069542885, 0.030162977054715157, -0.02924937568604946, 0.07867414504289627, -0.009345619939267635, -0.009443167597055435, 0.01984551176428795, -0.04737932235002518, -0.06471064686775208, 0.0045193275436758995, 0.033861685544252396, 0.053080715239048004, -4.507178275048318e-8, 0.00830861646682024, 0.013732831925153732, -0.0974183902144432, 0.02686569280922413, -0.021684003993868828, -0.0023395568132400513, -0.072099968791008, -0.045257825404405594, 0.04112827405333519, 0.12192472815513611, 0.05665507912635803, -0.04602411016821861, -0.10198137909173965, 0.0008090006886050105, -0.012018146924674511, -0.008794565685093403, -0.036214035004377365, -0.005952281877398491, -0.0493534691631794, -0.06915006786584854, 0.010340186767280102, 0.007769141811877489, -0.0739852637052536, -0.020674705505371094, -0.05473988875746727, 0.04070444777607918, -0.0062642875127494335, -0.01270083524286747, 0.056770842522382736, 0.03180663660168648, -0.11345749348402023, 0.058383285999298096, -0.11260364204645157, -0.025556886568665504, -0.034397441893815994, 0.0022212513722479343, -0.02713192068040371, -0.0508308969438076, 0.07383187115192413, 0.07490716874599457, 0.052109189331531525, 0.1449262797832489, -0.04717244580388069, -0.034056637436151505, -0.008597961626946926, -0.010115927085280418, -0.07478103786706924, 0.0008437163778580725, 0.00571685703471303, 0.026044625788927078, -0.0004697014228440821, -0.049666304141283035, 0.028916621580719948, 0.005514506250619888, 0.03926997631788254, 0.05254605785012245, 0.032448288053274155, -0.09399907290935516, 0.009391086176037788, -0.03334178403019905, 0.005766798742115498, -0.04956039786338806, 0.06340382248163223, 0.010394907556474209 ]

{ "pdf_file": "DTYPSU6H33ZSSVI63PEM45AYRXUODI5I.pdf", "text": "Rep. Campbell Awarded “Guardian of Worker Freedom”\nToday, Rep. Campbell (R-CA) was honored by the Alliance for Worker Freedom (AWF) with\ntheir fifth annual “Guardian of Worker Freedom.” The free-market, worker rights organization\npresents the award to members of the U.S. Congress who vote in favor of worker’s rights, and\nfree and open labor markets ... \nToday, Rep. Campbell (R-CA) was honored by the Alliance for Worker Freedom (AWF) with\ntheir fifth annual “Guardian of Worker Freedom.” The free-market, worker rights organization\npresents the award to members of the U.S. Congress who vote in favor of worker’s rights, and\nfree and open labor markets on over 80% of the national policy issues tracked by AWF. \n \n \n \nFor the 2nd session of this 110th Congress, the “Guardian of Worker Freedom” award was given\nto Congressmen who voted for freedom and opportunity for workers against special interests\nand regulatory control. The restoring of funding to the Office of Labor Management Standards,\nopposing expanded application of Davis-Bacon prevailing wages in federal transportation grants\nand energy, agricultural, military and school construction contracts, opposing burdensome\nregulation of the mining industry (“S-MINER”) and opposing expansive wage discrimination\nlegislation that subjects employers to punitive damages for even unintentional wage errors,\nwere all tracked in this 2nd Congressional session. \n \n \n \n“By voting in favor of workers rights and freedoms, and against the corrupt agenda of Big Labor\nunion bosses and an ever-expanding regulatory regime, these Congressmen deserve to be\nhonored for siding with the rank-and-file American worker,” said AWF Executive Director Brian\nM. Johnson. “Rep. Campbell is without a doubt a true guaridan of worker freedom.” \n \n \n 1 / 3 Rep. Campbell Awarded “Guardian of Worker Freedom”\n \n56 members of the U.S. House of Representatives and 12 U.S. Senators were presented with\nthe “Guardian of Worker Freedom” award for their courageous votes on behalf of American\nworkers. \n \n \n \n“Rep. Campbell clearly knows the difference between being pro-worker freedom or a\nunion-puppet,” continued Johnson. “When it comes to keeping American workers and our\neconomy competitive, Rep. Campbell is a tremendous advocate for a twenty-first century\nworkforce.” \n \n \n \nCongressional Ratings can be found at AWF Website: www.workerfreedom.org \n \n \n \n \n 2 / 3 Rep. Campbell Awarded “Guardian of Worker Freedom”\n \n 3 / 3" }

[ -0.14297990500926971, 0.03521398454904556, -0.04485499858856201, 0.010398117825388908, 0.006949614267796278, 0.02249491773545742, 0.03140680864453316, 0.05711192265152931, 0.044259656220674515, -0.003960262052714825, 0.016795678064227104, -0.010155657306313515, 0.02449895441532135, -0.041114263236522675, -0.04119643196463585, -0.03303910046815872, 0.05864632874727249, -0.012841165997087955, -0.06499256193637848, 0.02408575266599655, -0.017929445952177048, 0.03371167182922363, -0.05143633484840393, 0.03761863335967064, -0.03412308916449547, -0.045146893709897995, -0.056470755487680435, -0.05721358209848404, 0.055934589356184006, -0.04213554412126541, 0.05497831478714943, 0.11402087658643723, -0.028346218168735504, 0.0025396307464689016, 0.02684125490486622, 0.0010202627163380384, -0.03598816692829132, -0.012456974014639854, -0.009027866646647453, -0.0006825623568147421, 0.006209712475538254, -0.02953539974987507, -0.09075863659381866, 0.04770989716053009, 0.01001732423901558, 0.018454257398843765, 0.054008662700653076, -0.026614831760525703, -0.11336222290992737, 0.024041922762989998, -0.060994893312454224, 0.01306191086769104, -0.016887148842215538, -0.0020094900391995907, -0.0504271537065506, -0.05231855437159538, -0.02601057104766369, -0.050621796399354935, -0.05474469065666199, 0.029685169458389282, -0.06396667659282684, 0.013042157515883446, -0.05108921602368355, 0.04085031524300575, -0.012076448649168015, 0.05449848994612694, 0.03845817968249321, -0.010622141882777214, 0.06277915090322495, 0.011005030013620853, 0.01365519966930151, 0.015635844320058823, -0.013629978522658348, 0.04614513739943504, 0.0005857482319697738, 0.03731324523687363, -0.04683690518140793, 0.007023765705525875, 0.022019820287823677, -0.08490689843893051, 0.09684735536575317, 0.09080089628696442, 0.019193405285477638, -0.006480844225734472, 0.02391556091606617, -0.10302886366844177, 0.055986616760492325, -0.028782054781913757, 0.08266263455152512, 0.0021799150854349136, 0.05966443940997124, -0.0665840283036232, 0.02933240495622158, -0.012760794721543789, -0.0018719945801422, -0.03888465836644173, -0.04846133291721344, 0.011616718955338001, -0.005613070912659168, 0.032515380531549454, -0.003846528707072139, 0.010440273210406303, -0.018410608172416687, -0.005904041230678558, -0.07078764587640762, -0.05187529698014259, 0.033225174993276596, -0.026104001328349113, 0.041204746812582016, 0.10151895135641098, 0.0008625469054095447, -0.006857586558908224, -0.007115645334124565, -0.08545444160699844, 0.027080144733190536, 0.03252514824271202, -0.055572547018527985, 0.04643707349896431, 0.06673505157232285, 0.011428720317780972, -0.0027847448363900185, -0.03174964711070061, -0.005759594962000847, 0.03506944701075554, -0.0067124878987669945, -0.08621977269649506, -0.05345581844449043, 4.4835720222743075e-33, -0.0129858935251832, -0.016451509669423103, 0.017917092889547348, 0.09884852916002274, -0.04304342344403267, 0.05708731338381767, -0.016536010429263115, -0.05937420576810837, 0.02704532817006111, 0.011306844651699066, 0.014848732389509678, 0.016799556091427803, 0.05036727711558342, 0.01356823742389679, -0.03547000512480736, 0.042806848883628845, -0.04725370556116104, 0.04708259180188179, -0.03127947822213173, 0.00884209107607603, 0.14856816828250885, 0.03326316550374031, -0.038354016840457916, 0.031683627516031265, 0.017331888899207115, -0.01588754914700985, -0.06875438243150711, -0.08398734033107758, -0.027051620185375214, 0.010352909564971924, 0.033067088574171066, -0.0005234717391431332, 0.08913739025592804, 0.015010992996394634, 0.07013174146413803, 0.039703287184238434, -0.020502295345067978, -0.054978422820568085, 0.0071133277378976345, 0.02631024643778801, 0.07009150087833405, 0.025812499225139618, 0.038478750735521317, 0.038648709654808044, 0.014990822412073612, -0.07345376163721085, -0.08082335442304611, 0.0006420012796297669, -0.03858266770839691, -0.04953230172395706, 0.022965051233768463, 0.049699362367391586, -0.060127150267362595, -0.0711730420589447, 0.038564808666706085, 0.008522852323949337, -0.07323282212018967, -0.002235285472124815, 0.01359201967716217, 0.033584821969270706, 0.0341971181333065, 0.04490441083908081, -0.05030619353055954, -0.03635061904788017, -0.03986770659685135, -0.04280879348516464, -0.11445023864507675, -0.11566802114248276, 0.07544668763875961, -0.07522524893283844, -0.1116860955953598, 0.08923511207103729, -0.014380676671862602, -0.041603025048971176, 0.015988396480679512, -0.05527791008353233, 0.032473258674144745, -0.0077783758752048016, 0.0380282886326313, -0.02874700352549553, 0.02132636494934559, -0.0438833050429821, -0.002743807388469577, 0.0911378338932991, -0.032183486968278885, -0.06006370112299919, -0.0033569771330803633, 0.08471933007240295, -0.04819202050566673, 0.04778856784105301, 0.13467277586460114, -0.013828015886247158, -0.05173797160387039, 0.0028854496777057648, 0.0005512229981832206, -5.9023139905061434e-33, -0.012269769795238972, -0.062016818672418594, -0.008833895437419415, -0.003430415643379092, -0.004714507609605789, 0.06434737890958786, 0.019470304250717163, -0.05648825690150261, 0.09554159641265869, -0.05145341157913208, -0.015499946661293507, 0.005292763002216816, 0.032292239367961884, -0.05665118247270584, -0.03598785400390625, 0.030625535175204277, -0.05642139911651611, 0.0589790865778923, -0.08079353719949722, 0.09262305498123169, 0.005278914235532284, -0.009877045638859272, 0.037999797612428665, 0.029041877016425133, 0.057363249361515045, -0.004859317094087601, 0.006996335927397013, 0.00874379463493824, 0.0592360645532608, 0.06426332890987396, -0.02620571106672287, -0.005649727303534746, -0.14752860367298126, -0.06263712048530579, -0.1047414019703865, -0.1227681115269661, 0.034924134612083435, 0.07119225710630417, -0.08405957370996475, 0.027053864672780037, 0.027706412598490715, 0.06036354973912239, -0.10087892413139343, 0.011611418798565865, -0.017137560993433, -0.06815428286790848, -0.010103605687618256, -0.023989368230104446, 0.061396706849336624, 0.01763346418738365, 0.04721678048372269, -0.038446903228759766, 0.06320011615753174, 0.02831554226577282, 0.0031335330568253994, -0.042377207428216934, 0.007018938660621643, -0.07711538672447205, -0.059217669069767, 0.0442698709666729, 0.11257714778184891, 0.09825452417135239, -0.0670592337846756, -0.014735495671629906, 0.10559205710887909, -0.008886812254786491, -0.00110720400698483, 0.044138796627521515, 0.04065542668104172, -0.05442139133810997, -0.01006565522402525, -0.1422194242477417, -0.0336722768843174, -0.07216111570596695, 0.1287793666124344, -0.008627476170659065, -0.02411150187253952, -0.08290748298168182, -0.06679517030715942, 0.060195934027433395, -0.05447012931108475, -0.024449799209833145, -0.011698943562805653, 0.035002462565898895, 0.058045271784067154, 0.03937283158302307, 0.052277471870183945, -0.05686257407069206, 0.1207657977938652, 0.021756291389465332, -0.03875649347901344, -0.02172918990254402, 0.015662848949432373, -0.0478813499212265, -0.05876166746020317, -5.8996903362640296e-8, 0.01670965738594532, -0.029866497963666916, -0.03274843841791153, 0.06404785066843033, 0.026516936719417572, -0.04964646324515343, -0.07525255531072617, -0.03282082453370094, -0.036254800856113434, 0.018973762169480324, 0.1212305948138237, 0.015307766385376453, -0.010386912152171135, -0.0888926237821579, 0.08431022614240646, 0.0392364002764225, 0.03678634762763977, -0.05907399579882622, -0.044257961213588715, -0.08374287188053131, -0.06164735183119774, -0.03415634483098984, -0.05042990669608116, 0.06635270267724991, 0.010487916879355907, 0.034744150936603546, 0.04318994656205177, 0.04629126563668251, 0.013650183565914631, 0.06485598534345627, -0.0013473548460751772, -0.06114994361996651, 0.07479086518287659, 0.011581094935536385, -0.02876359038054943, 0.022339314222335815, 0.07922661304473877, 0.005611640401184559, 0.010108905844390392, 0.022954115644097328, 0.013159616850316525, 0.056654635816812515, 0.01518024317920208, 0.08322027325630188, 0.06106290966272354, 0.027711758390069008, 0.008364771492779255, -0.07616930454969406, 0.010051196441054344, -0.04050404578447342, 0.003823311300948262, 0.0016415162244811654, 0.03703184425830841, 0.10153138637542725, 0.024342330172657967, 0.04624633118510246, 0.07246536761522293, 0.04155289754271507, 0.011501952074468136, -0.04256231710314751, -0.010064991191029549, 0.02239944227039814, -0.023031746968626976, -0.008219934068620205 ]

{ "pdf_file": "PMCR2PO7DRFQD3UBJ7V5ACOUOTV6KSPS.pdf", "text": "6412 CFR Ch. I (1±1±99 Edition) §5.10\ndata, supplementary information, and\ninformation submitted by interested\npersons, to the extent that those docu-\nments have not been afforded confiden-\ntial treatment. Applicants and other\ninterested persons may request that\nconfidential treatment be afforded in-\nformation submitted to the OCC pursu-\nant to paragraph (c) of this section.\n(c) Confidential treatment. The appli-\ncant or an interested person submit-\nting information may request that spe-\ncific information be treated as con-\nfidential under the Freedom of Infor-\nmation Act, 5 U.S.C. 552 ( see 12 CFR\n4.12(b)). A submitter should draft its re-\nquest for confidential treatment nar-\nrowly to extend only to those portions\nof a document it considers to be con-\nfidential. If a submitter requests con-\nfidential treatment for information\nthat the OCC does not consider to be\nconfidential, the OCC may include that\ninformation in the public file after pro-\nviding notice to the submitter. More-\nover, at its own initiative, the OCC\nmay determine that certain informa-\ntion should be treated as confidential\nand withhold that information from\nthe public file. A person requesting in-\nformation withheld from the public file\nshould submit the request to the Dis-\nclosure Officer, Communications Divi-\nsion, under the procedures described in\n12 CFR part 4, subpart B. That request\nmay be subject to the predisclosure no-\ntice procedures of 12 CFR 4.16.\n§5.10 Comments.\n(a) Submission of comments. During the\ncomment period, any person may sub-\nmit written comments on a filing to\nthe appropriate district office.\n(b) Comment periodÐ (1) General. Un-\nless otherwise stated, the comment pe-\nriod is 30 days after publication of the\npublic notice required by § 5.8(a).\n(2) Extension. The OCC may extend\nthe comment period if:\n(i) The applicant fails to file all re-\nquired publicly available information\non a timely basis to permit review by\ninterested persons or makes a request\nfor confidential treatment not granted\nby the OCC that delays the public\navailability of that information;\n(ii) Any person requesting an exten-\nsion of time satisfactorily dem-\nonstrates to the OCC that additionaltime is necessary to develop factual in-\nformation that the OCC determines is\nnecessary to consider the application;\nor\n(iii) The OCC determines that other\nextenuating circumstances exist.\n(3) Applicant response. The OCC may\ngive the applicant an opportunity to\nrespond to comments received.\n§5.11 Hearings and other meetings.\n(a) Hearing requests. Prior to the end\nof the comment period, any person may\nsubmit to the appropriate district of-\nfice a written request for a hearing on\na filing. The request must describe the\nnature of the issues or facts to be pre-\nsented and the reasons why written\nsubmissions would be insufficient to\nmake an adequate presentation of\nthose issues or facts to the OCC. A per-\nson requesting a hearing shall simulta-\nneously submit a copy of the request to\nthe applicant.\n(b) Action on a hearing request. The\nOCC may grant or deny a request for a\nhearing and may limit the issues to\nthose it deems relevant or material.\nThe OCC generally grants a hearing re-\nquest only if the OCC determines that\nwritten submissions would be insuffi-\ncient or that a hearing would otherwise\nbenefit the decisionmaking process.\nThe OCC also may order a hearing if it\nconcludes that a hearing would be in\nthe public interest.\n(c) Denial of a hearing request. If the\nOCC denies a hearing request, it shall\nnotify the person requesting the hear-\ning of the reason for the denial.\n(d) OCC procedures prior to the hear-\ningÐ (1) Notice of Hearing. The OCC\nissues a Notice of Hearing if it grants a\nrequest for a hearing or orders a hear-\ning because it is in the public interest.\nThe OCC sends a copy of the Notice of\nHearing to the applicant, to the person\nrequesting the hearing, and anyone\nelse requesting a copy. The Notice of\nHearing states the subject and date of\nthe filing, the time and place of the\nhearing, and the issues to be addressed.\n(2) Presiding officer. The OCC appoints\na presiding officer to conduct the hear-\ning. The presiding officer is responsible\nfor all procedural questions not gov-\nerned by this section.\nVerDate 12<JAN>99 14:43 Jan 27, 1999 Jkt 183033 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\\SGML\\183033T.XXX pfrm08 PsN: 183033T" }

[ -0.009002609178423882, 0.022905267775058746, 0.10025577992200851, 0.025362495332956314, 0.016137707978487015, 0.026989392936229706, 0.011405875906348228, -0.046288833022117615, -0.07129544019699097, 0.018398042768239975, 0.02864634431898594, 0.03163401782512665, 0.08562582731246948, -0.02848081849515438, 0.032830674201250076, 0.04578555002808571, -0.03753979876637459, -0.04154682159423828, -0.07698474079370499, 0.11321323364973068, 0.11503951251506805, 0.12295756489038467, -0.07872249186038971, 0.05981849879026413, -0.00564147112891078, -0.02598796971142292, 0.044017281383275986, 0.0034439528826624155, -0.02349179983139038, -0.047778863459825516, -0.005781145300716162, -0.0686425268650055, -0.00769650237634778, -0.007833368144929409, 0.07441157847642899, -0.014896194450557232, -0.01931801624596119, -0.06889008730649948, -0.027868198230862617, 0.03290167823433876, 0.015400814823806286, -0.035582177340984344, -0.010142293758690357, 0.025394346565008163, -0.009483273141086102, 0.07089662551879883, -0.00918077677488327, -0.09740722924470901, 0.0007606363506056368, 0.07007097452878952, 0.0018899894785135984, 0.04822594299912453, -0.005773712415248156, -0.019836345687508583, 0.030997907742857933, -0.06116176396608353, 0.009326482191681862, 0.01924416609108448, 0.031092306599020958, -0.043319813907146454, 0.03276790305972099, 0.02158167213201523, -0.0013932832516729832, 0.011331303045153618, 0.02553541585803032, -0.054982952773571014, 0.03649018332362175, -0.006629666313529015, -0.03195933997631073, -0.03570963069796562, 0.013671141117811203, -0.013266881927847862, 0.06309540569782257, 0.03435397148132324, -0.0255817212164402, -0.02181343547999859, -0.026662271469831467, 0.06136125326156616, 0.022693702951073647, -0.02439543418586254, -0.006270004902034998, -0.07898787409067154, 0.08442855626344681, -0.039405886083841324, 0.03761593624949455, 0.009179106913506985, -0.06620439887046814, -0.02727273851633072, 0.0723775252699852, -0.008400938473641872, 0.05377767235040665, -0.04504164680838585, 0.04660253971815109, -0.00710662268102169, 0.03727530315518379, -0.02480653114616871, -0.10133259743452072, -0.09232945740222931, 0.0023136150557547808, 0.053465113043785095, -0.036532267928123474, -0.055205535143613815, -0.032526809722185135, 0.04270021989941597, 0.005404298659414053, -0.0766334980726242, -0.04220648109912872, -0.011799889616668224, -0.010547380894422531, 0.04379933327436447, 0.023136530071496964, -0.017130762338638306, 0.0639440268278122, -0.031053321436047554, -0.009168612770736217, 0.027934225276112556, -0.03976628556847572, 0.019099846482276917, 0.08493229746818542, -0.14663541316986084, 0.0880245789885521, -0.052313752472400665, 0.073641836643219, -0.059414781630039215, -0.004193614702671766, 0.026185087859630585, 0.014387632720172405, 2.4543207162246005e-33, 0.047573886811733246, -0.01395910419523716, -0.07716040313243866, -0.018643353134393692, 0.024087097495794296, -0.08437486737966537, 0.008227151818573475, -0.03225637227296829, 0.016414277255535126, -0.05374358594417572, 0.039891671389341354, -0.003832918358966708, 0.014580144546926022, -0.02316153235733509, -0.044202253222465515, 0.02868034690618515, 0.03613347187638283, 0.059397391974925995, -0.038745541125535965, 0.007481645792722702, -0.002738389652222395, -0.024486536160111427, 0.043672192841768265, 0.04532444849610329, -0.0828244611620903, -0.019965309649705887, 0.04718858376145363, -0.04129202291369438, -0.06324620544910431, 0.02506985142827034, 0.060227226465940475, 0.04257882386445999, 0.03406606242060661, 0.03997655585408211, -0.04646825045347214, -0.017035916447639465, -0.0679783970117569, 0.04028112441301346, -0.0026276009157299995, -0.05925975739955902, -0.006579607725143433, -0.051458559930324554, 0.019480697810649872, 0.008322722278535366, 0.04190725088119507, -0.07200353592634201, 0.054411597549915314, 0.033711060881614685, -0.0684192031621933, 0.023107370361685753, -0.04183188080787659, -0.010804062709212303, -0.04170169681310654, 0.01317960862070322, 0.002569085219874978, -0.053858451545238495, -0.03363068029284477, 0.00009254187170881778, -0.029071420431137085, -0.04646727815270424, 0.026576193049550056, 0.030241502448916435, 0.019899923354387283, -0.01912512257695198, -0.0355924554169178, 0.002100236713886261, -0.011015732772648335, 0.024904564023017883, 0.08794910460710526, -0.07825024425983429, 0.07551485300064087, -0.052412375807762146, 0.011384455487132072, -0.030719129368662834, -0.016558032482862473, -0.10316968709230423, 0.03957398980855942, -0.051957301795482635, 0.019437095150351524, 0.05868445709347725, -0.012740370817482471, -0.04676419869065285, 0.044262468814849854, 0.024491427466273308, 0.020780328661203384, -0.02178277261555195, 0.06223764643073082, 0.002413277979940176, -0.0328582338988781, -0.011548706330358982, 0.027961093932390213, -0.10307706892490387, 0.05203733593225479, 0.014429673552513123, 0.09603478759527206, -4.128082694118478e-33, -0.008566468954086304, -0.017046509310603142, 0.001406210009008646, -0.014383486472070217, -0.09047557413578033, -0.06877977401018143, 0.004017892759293318, -0.06479614228010178, -0.022076169028878212, -0.12460450828075409, -0.047146379947662354, 0.007793557830154896, -0.032703038305044174, 0.008805000223219395, 0.04923437908291817, 0.01200389675796032, -0.03038470447063446, -0.11206965148448944, 0.0010741932783275843, 0.04595605283975601, 0.0137561010196805, -0.023806152865290642, -0.04793955385684967, 0.06653987616300583, -0.010594962164759636, 0.02621021494269371, -0.008200401440262794, 0.014016827568411827, 0.1097312793135643, -0.01860220544040203, -0.0872882604598999, -0.02626010961830616, -0.04378241300582886, 0.08995778113603592, -0.0403696671128273, -0.10848075896501541, 0.1531398892402649, -0.004483331460505724, -0.08920887857675552, -0.003820437705144286, 0.10000196099281311, 0.03177115321159363, 0.09478651732206345, 0.06260712444782257, 0.02439551241695881, 0.006262529641389847, 0.08620404452085495, -0.05290403962135315, -0.003816079581156373, -0.010219221003353596, -0.001028271741233766, 0.014303344301879406, 0.04389791190624237, -0.003205500543117523, -0.07943115383386612, -0.020722709596157074, 0.009493617340922356, 0.032859813421964645, -0.08884921669960022, 0.021452417597174644, 0.05100405588746071, 0.03374819457530975, -0.0014559283154085279, 0.05970672890543938, -0.0035232219379395247, 0.05301695317029953, -0.06858330219984055, -0.10732508450746536, 0.02742897905409336, -0.01792231760919094, -0.11235468089580536, -0.07998821139335632, -0.07714922726154327, -0.09565284103155136, 0.051159679889678955, -0.03960090130567551, -0.026013650000095367, 0.004135502967983484, -0.08530917763710022, 0.050050850957632065, -0.03965315595269203, 0.015945522114634514, -0.12980490922927856, 0.013708784244954586, 0.08064698427915573, -0.05976833030581474, 0.047449562698602676, -0.020229510962963104, 0.06636244803667068, 0.10443993657827377, -0.11524173617362976, 0.08117610216140747, -0.02895549312233925, 0.04775968939065933, -0.07603199779987335, -5.227474275670829e-8, 0.013566533103585243, -0.0028299535624682903, -0.008906480856239796, -0.03440183773636818, 0.12744121253490448, -0.060275204479694366, 0.03599381446838379, 0.021954532712697983, -0.016081903129816055, -0.03924569487571716, 0.04897867515683174, 0.1335037350654602, 0.054833993315696716, -0.043838515877723694, -0.007517894729971886, -0.08458030223846436, 0.0468214750289917, 0.004573558922857046, -0.05511369928717613, 0.07000275701284409, 0.023920075967907906, -0.04509372264146805, -0.015650207176804543, 0.01741495542228222, -0.06543588638305664, 0.023126596584916115, 0.06174866482615471, 0.03220638260245323, 0.03019939549267292, -0.013257227838039398, -0.03759200498461723, 0.02700604870915413, 0.028153060004115105, 0.014476876705884933, -0.04756733775138855, -0.007910466752946377, 0.08769925683736801, 0.0037563450168818235, 0.043291907757520676, -0.005312954541295767, 0.004437451250851154, 0.025532864034175873, 0.02893715910613537, 0.07701509445905685, 0.03418797627091408, -0.05611094459891319, -0.1202082559466362, -0.025468876585364342, 0.07097161561250687, -0.08879737555980682, -0.03229549899697304, -0.037359874695539474, -0.03809373825788498, 0.05469873547554016, 0.03049848973751068, 0.019833210855722427, 0.0611589178442955, -0.048217445611953735, 0.060983382165431976, 0.09208636730909348, 0.058613285422325134, -0.04601456597447395, 0.000874843040946871, -0.006051531992852688 ]

{ "pdf_file": "L25T3UJ2GCRQ5HZHAEKUSBDG3PSJV3CX.pdf", "text": "HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nTWENTY-FOURTH LEGISLATURE, 2007 \nSTATE OF HAWAII H.B. ~0.7q \nA BILL FOR AN ACT \nRELATING TO PROPERTY INSURANCE. \nBE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII: \nSECTION 1. Chapter 431, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is \namended by adding a new section to article 10E to be \nappropriately designated and to read as follows: \n\"S431:lOE- Property insurance; renewal following \ncatastrophe. Every property insurance policy shall provide for \nthe renewal of the policy at least once following any property \nloss or damage covered by the policy and caused by seismic wave, \nflood, fire, hurricane, earthquake, storm, volcanic activity, \nexplosion, or other catastrophe.\" \nSECTION 2. This Act does not affect rights and duties that \nmatured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were \nbegun, before its effective date. \nSECTION 3. New statutory material is underscored. \nSECTION 4. This Act shall take effect upon its approval. \nINTRODUCED BY: \\wL \nJAN 1 7 2007 \nHB LRB 07-0594.d0~ H.B. NO. 7 \nReport Title: \nProperty Insurance; Renewal Following Catastrophe \nDescription : \nRequires the renewal of property insurance at least once \nfollowing the loss or damage of any covered property of the \ninsured resulting from a catastrophe. \nHB LRB 07-0594.doc " }

[ -0.099909208714962, 0.14421746134757996, -0.00551235256716609, 0.024902449920773506, 0.05169806629419327, 0.027601514011621475, 0.008195696398615837, -0.00784229300916195, 0.05072419345378876, 0.06220552697777748, 0.0647302120923996, 0.08600685745477676, 0.048814237117767334, -0.056385669857263565, -0.10603785514831543, 0.03453832119703293, 0.07344216853380203, 0.035430148243904114, -0.013669628649950027, 0.05804089084267616, 0.01571306213736534, 0.04695967584848404, 0.014021308161318302, 0.010286582633852959, -0.0017969775944948196, -0.026034384965896606, -0.07139705866575241, -0.055962640792131424, 0.016008147969841957, -0.044520217925310135, 0.0019062713254243135, 0.046600013971328735, -0.03484214097261429, 0.015070558525621891, 0.07230124622583389, -0.026119381189346313, 0.11335094273090363, -0.04029037430882454, 0.050011102110147476, 0.009632271714508533, 0.04639226198196411, 0.006922936998307705, 0.004540194757282734, -0.033855121582746506, -0.09690667688846588, 0.025245504453778267, 0.05420637130737305, -0.01879718340933323, -0.05990977585315704, 0.03274610638618469, -0.06070518493652344, -0.03704493120312691, -0.019879693165421486, 0.08774659782648087, -0.0011082952842116356, -0.07201055437326431, -0.001311957137659192, 0.0071792458184063435, -0.047038305550813675, 0.044231489300727844, -0.021029436960816383, -0.012437609024345875, -0.05062415823340416, 0.05457967519760132, 0.0010422924533486366, 0.07131511718034744, 0.01796693727374077, -0.11122997105121613, 0.06424795836210251, 0.0022961017675697803, 0.06609629094600677, 0.01178831234574318, 0.0016220200341194868, -0.027435297146439552, -0.01812739670276642, 0.007307037711143494, 0.042397260665893555, 0.030959155410528183, 0.020261043682694435, -0.0801156759262085, 0.006965727545320988, -0.05605648085474968, 0.014539074152708054, -0.07255527377128601, -0.059717532247304916, -0.04190225899219513, -0.020292513072490692, 0.023256391286849976, 0.06302089989185333, -0.07423429936170578, 0.03568612039089203, -0.09306086599826813, -0.02719157375395298, -0.020963367074728012, 0.06794387847185135, -0.05999401584267616, -0.04180224612355232, 0.01731579750776291, 0.030194401741027832, 0.08052470535039902, 0.048823099583387375, 0.07046201825141907, 0.0014616711996495724, -0.007933483459055424, 0.004908870905637741, -0.049617886543273926, -0.0350567065179348, 0.023798085749149323, -0.050887953490018845, 0.04221345856785774, -0.0039116451516747475, 0.0620252788066864, -0.01534146536141634, 0.02741222083568573, 0.02199574001133442, 0.023949936032295227, 0.014462262392044067, 0.1014602854847908, -0.010062053799629211, -0.07282377034425735, 0.0708298310637474, 0.04917392507195473, -0.07072116434574127, 0.030912935733795166, -0.03776610270142555, 0.0013534273020923138, -0.021639134734869003, -8.932880037261076e-34, 0.04493548721075058, -0.008469641208648682, -0.03162321820855141, -0.0742998942732811, 0.052231315523386, 0.03137601912021637, 0.03911571204662323, -0.04093943536281586, 0.0628259927034378, 0.014790580607950687, -0.031524769961833954, -0.011197825893759727, 0.08697951585054398, -0.10030639916658401, -0.10788270831108093, 0.004244410898536444, -0.030115744099020958, 0.06346701085567474, -0.030577803030610085, -0.017468344420194626, 0.107508584856987, 0.020832441747188568, -0.06916210800409317, 0.034121934324502945, -0.06858458369970322, -0.004054929595440626, -0.02237224206328392, -0.014942663721740246, -0.042605090886354446, 0.0057042064145207405, -0.0698893815279007, 0.04032199829816818, 0.08234736323356628, 0.044843483716249466, 0.10876689106225967, 0.05501909181475639, -0.001499329460784793, -0.041670702397823334, 0.043073587119579315, 0.010818764567375183, -0.008170360699295998, 0.05399419367313385, -0.01980537921190262, -0.08901289105415344, -0.07601355016231537, -0.06298694759607315, -0.02010042406618595, 0.004837242886424065, 0.0351526141166687, -0.008981273509562016, 0.03526805341243744, 0.020637907087802887, 0.07232137024402618, -0.06396336108446121, -0.03813028335571289, -0.011659740470349789, -0.010063471272587776, -0.06043536961078644, -0.02778790146112442, 0.007997721433639526, -0.002578209852799773, 0.056381210684776306, -0.060637425631284714, -0.009324454702436924, -0.10652224719524384, -0.07180660218000412, -0.0969715565443039, -0.03816184774041176, 0.002710394561290741, -0.06256309151649475, -0.03005395457148552, 0.019588325172662735, -0.004585356917232275, -0.026603762060403824, 0.021528970450162888, -0.0975240096449852, 0.06209272891283035, 0.02224021404981613, 0.02586871013045311, -0.0783146321773529, -0.054743777960538864, -0.10031622648239136, -0.004448846913874149, 0.026804177090525627, 0.000640951213426888, -0.04007187485694885, -0.0321432501077652, 0.004459555726498365, 0.008218321017920971, -0.011369512416422367, 0.03300761431455612, 0.005714158061891794, -0.09112627804279327, 0.03306667134165764, 0.04172655567526817, -2.6098619450544133e-33, -0.045515116304159164, -0.018755782395601273, -0.06641843169927597, 0.025509076192975044, -0.03552395850419998, 0.0017946945736184716, 0.007817567326128483, -0.01199076697230339, -0.014197180047631264, -0.1707361936569214, 0.008012034930288792, -0.03672691434621811, -0.02804035320878029, 0.016490785405039787, -0.08396326005458832, 0.003040878102183342, 0.025402499362826347, -0.0006489664083346725, -0.003006085054948926, 0.06810997426509857, 0.02757265791296959, 0.028905270621180534, -0.036500122398138046, 0.0035034220200031996, -0.002753831911832094, -0.029688948765397072, 0.109665147960186, -0.015421121381223202, 0.0048051937483251095, 0.01887599192559719, -0.03260276839137077, -0.07360653579235077, -0.05302763357758522, -0.003397222375497222, 0.006835571955889463, -0.002064101630821824, 0.0795806348323822, 0.06820881366729736, -0.03255686163902283, 0.01879846304655075, 0.044839564710855484, 0.11098381131887436, 0.02300507016479969, 0.05783859267830849, -0.000767819641623646, 0.09257795661687851, -0.02408190444111824, 0.041595980525016785, -0.0026732832193374634, -0.0001190772745758295, -0.0867726132273674, 0.021025769412517548, 0.03370315954089165, 0.0032013210002332926, -0.06487477570772171, -0.012414702214300632, -0.009253724478185177, -0.01670890487730503, -0.062103718519210815, 0.01990373246371746, 0.05372893437743187, 0.1313541978597641, -0.07808127999305725, -0.10582760721445084, 0.06366734206676483, 0.028442207723855972, -0.06290452182292938, -0.028923319652676582, 0.033995650708675385, -0.020993473008275032, -0.05772513523697853, -0.09742944687604904, -0.0039498405531048775, -0.09024002403020859, 0.13083729147911072, 0.07494543492794037, -0.00891505554318428, -0.03513023257255554, -0.11697642505168915, 0.0004701307334471494, 0.07643590122461319, -0.01469236146658659, -0.022193152457475662, 0.0008825846016407013, -0.011074276641011238, 0.13309437036514282, 0.01850305125117302, -0.020551558583974838, -0.003654313739389181, 0.0550602488219738, 0.0004284263704903424, -0.019882284104824066, 0.022850805893540382, 0.03186584636569023, -0.017302896827459335, -5.9083216541466754e-8, -0.03576110303401947, 0.055480752140283585, -0.03497700393199921, -0.052926838397979736, 0.016900889575481415, 0.02102210372686386, 0.03985144942998886, -0.021049996837973595, -0.006207669619470835, -0.03481433168053627, 0.08126014471054077, -0.010801021941006184, -0.050087686628103256, -0.05461221933364868, -0.016420744359493256, -0.10026141256093979, -0.02968708798289299, -0.05464700236916542, -0.07042037695646286, 0.0049563259817659855, -0.07261663675308228, -0.05884869024157524, -0.052357017993927, 0.030383959412574768, 0.08509897440671921, 0.03432110697031021, 0.04137129709124565, 0.008458934724330902, -0.0024696802720427513, 0.07069418579339981, -0.06201088801026344, 0.09623311460018158, -0.03723549470305443, -0.01921677030622959, -0.0764397606253624, 0.026463232934474945, 0.02677704580128193, 0.10476885735988617, 0.04060985893011093, 0.013502578251063824, -0.011096792295575142, 0.009975881315767765, 0.026691114529967308, 0.03914041072130203, 0.06409883499145508, 0.010238824412226677, 0.00472545251250267, -0.08101502805948257, 0.029356835409998894, -0.02208166942000389, 0.0019544241949915886, -0.07615832984447479, 0.008204787038266659, 0.06335817277431488, 0.06724687665700912, 0.02635800838470459, 0.05040909722447395, -0.019305143505334854, -0.10251759737730026, -0.06917061656713486, 0.04363636299967766, 0.014917821623384953, 0.038487210869789124, 0.06972808390855789 ]

{ "pdf_file": "CMKTEAMIWZYAZM4XVNX6MDAOWI4G7VD6.pdf", "text": "UNPUBLISHED\nIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA\nCENTRAL DIVISION\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,\nPlaintiff, No. CR05-3010-MWB\nvs. REPORT AND\nRECOMMENDATION ON MOTION\nTO SUPPRESSLARRY DEAN JONES, JR.,\nDefendant.\n____________________\nThis matter is before the court on a motion to suppress evidence and supporting\nbrief filed by the defendant Larry Dean Jones, Jr. (Doc. Nos. 15 & 20, respectively)\nThe plaintiff (the “Government”) filed a resistance to the motion (Doc. No. 27), as well\nas two supplements containing exhibits for the court’s consideration. (Doc. Nos. 28 &\n32)\nPursuant to the trial management order entered in this case (Doc. No. 9), motions\nto suppress were assigned to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for review,\nand the filing of a report and recommended disposition. Accordingly, the court held a\nhearing on Jones’s motion on May 16, 2005. Jones appeared in person with his attorney,\nJohn Doran. Assistant U.S. Attorney Forde Fairchild appeared on behalf of the Govern-\nment. The Government offered the testimony of Cerro Gordo County Deputy Sheriff\nMatt Klunder. The following exhibits were admitted into evidence: Gov’t Ex. 1 - search\nwarrant application (see Doc. No. 28); Gov’t Ex. 2 - search warrant ( id.); and Gov’t\nEx. 3 - log of radio transmission between Deputy Klunder and dispatcher on\nSeptember 11, 2004 ( see Doc. No. 32). 2The court allowed the parties to submit supplemental argument and authorities, and\non May 20, 2005, Jones filed a supplemental brief. (Doc. No. 33) On May 23, 2005, the\nGovernment filed a motion (Doc. No. 35) to reopen the record for the purpose of\nclarifying a point in Deputy Klunder’s testimony. The court granted the motion (Doc.\nNo. 36), and on May 27, 2005, the Government filed, with Jones’s consent, an Affidavit\nof Deputy Klunder. (Doc. No. 37) The motion is now fully submitted and ready for\nconsideration.\nFACTUAL BACKGROUND\nThe court makes the following findings of fact based on the exhibits, Deputy\nKlunder’s testimony at the hearing, and Deputy Klunder’s supplemental affidavit. On\nSeptember 11, 2004, Deputy Klunder was working a normal patrol assignment when he\nsaw a vehicle he recognized as belonging to Jones. Deputy Klunder had received\ninformation from another officer indicating Jones was selling methamphetamine out of his\nresidence in Mason City, Iowa, and that Jones carried drugs in his vehicle. ( See Gov’t\nEx. 1 at 8) When Deputy Klunder saw Jones’s vehicle on this occasion, he noticed the\nfront passenger window was colored with a dark tint which the officer believed was in\nviolation of Iowa law.\nJones turned into a convenience store parking lot and pulled up next to the gas\npumps. Deputy Klunder pulled in behind Jones, activating his emergency lights. Jones\nimmediately got out of his vehicle, which the officer found unusual. He testified he has\nmade a few thousand traffic stops, and the motorists very seldom get out of their vehicles\nwhen they are pulled over. The officer acknowledged that Jones could have been\nstopping to get gas, but he still found Jones’s behavior unusual. He told Jones to get back\ninto his vehicle, and Jones complied. 3Deputy Klunder approached the vehicle and asked Jones for his driver’s license,\nvehicle registration, and insurance card. The officer informed Jones he had been stopped\nbecause of the window tint. In response to Jones’s inquiry, the officer explained Iowa\nlaw requires front windows to allow in at least 70% of the light. Deputy Klunder used\na light meter and determined the front windows on Jones’s vehicle allowed in only 14%\nof the light, making the tint in violation of Iowa law.\nJones stated he did not have his driver’s license with him. He looked in the\nvehicle’s center console and looked around the passenger compartment, but was unable\nto produce a registration or insurance card. Deputy Klunder suggested, more than once,\nthat the documents might be in the vehicle’s glove box and Jones should look there, but\nalthough Jones reached toward the glove box at one point, he declined to open the glove\nbox. The officer noticed Jones’s hands were shaking and he appeared nervous.\nWhile Jones was looking for his registration and insurance card, Deputy Klunder\nnoticed Jones had a police scanner on the front seat of his vehicle. In his experience,\ndrug dealers often use scanners to track police movements, but he noticed Jones’s scanner\nwas not on at the time. Jones said he was on his way to the races, and he was taking the\nscanner to use at the races. The officer was aware that scanners sometimes can be used\nto listen to the race car drivers communicating with their pit crews, but that did not allay\nhis suspicion arising from the scanner’s presence.\nThe officer also noticed a very strong odor of air freshener coming from the\nvehicle. In the officer’s experience, drug traffickers often use strong air fresheners to\nmask drug odors. These observations, together with Jones’s nervousness and his refusal\nto open the glove box, made Deputy Klunder nervous. He asked Jones for permission to\nsearch his person for weapons, and Jones consented to a search of his person. The\nofficer also asked if he could search Jones’s vehicle. In response, Jones reached into the 1Jones ultimately was not cited for failure to produce proof of insurance because Deputy Klunder later\nfound the insurance verification in the vehicle’s glove box.\n4back seat and pulled out a twelve-pack of pop and a blanket, holding these items up and\nstating that was all he had in the vehicle. The officer also found this behavior to be highly\nunusual.\nDeputy Klunder verified that a valid driver’s license had been issued to Jones and\nthe vehicle was registered properly, but Jones had told the officer he did not have proof\nof insurance. Based on his observations and Jones’s behavior, the officer became\nsuspicious that Jones was involved in illegal activity. Deputy Klunder called for a K-9\nunit to come to the scene. When the K-9 unit arrived, Deputy Klunder told Jones the dog\nwas going to walk around Jones’s vehicle, and he asked Jones to get out of his car. Jones\nappeared to become more nervous. He rolled up the windows, got out of the vehicle, and\nshut the door. The fact that Jones closed all the windows before exiting the vehicle added\nto Deputy Klunder’s suspicion. The dog walked around the vehicle but although the dog\nappeared to stop and sniff at some areas, the dog did not indicate the presence of drugs\nin the vehicle. Nevertheless, Deputy Klunder and the K-9 officer determined the dog’s\nbehavior warrante d further investigation. At that point, Deputy Klunder placed Jones\nunder arrest for not having a driver’s license, vehicle registration, or insurance card, and\nfor having illegal tint on his front windows.1 The officers then proceeded to search\nJones’s vehicle. They opened the doors and the drug dog sniffed the vehicle’s interior,\nindicating on the glove box.\nAfter the dog indicated on the glove box, Deputy Klunder read Jones his Miranda\nrights and asked him for the keys to the glove box. Jones declined to produce the keys,\nso the officers broke open the glove box. Inside, they found two zippered pouches, one\ncontaining drug paraphernalia, and the other containing a hand scale, some paraphernalia, 5and a plastic bag of white powder that field-tested positive for methamphetamine. In the\nvehicle’s trunk, the officers found a black bag containing more methamphetamine and\nparaphernalia. At 6:08 p.m., Jones was transported to the Cerro Gordo County Jail by\na another officer. (See Gov’t Ex. 3) Thus, a total of forty-three minutes elapsed from the\ntime Deputy Klunder initiated the traffic stop until Jones was transported from the scene.\n(Id.)\nDeputy Klunder then prepared an application for a warrant to search an apartment\nin Mason City, Iowa. The application form itself (Gov’t Ex. 1) consisted of five pages.\nIt was signed on page 5 by Deputy Klunder, and a Cerro Gordo County magistrate also\nsigned on page 5 indicating Deputy Klunder had sworn to the statements contained in the\napplication. ( See also Doc. No. 37) The address of the apartment appeared on page 2\nof the application, along with the description of the location as a “2 story apartment\ncomplex with yellow siding and brick base.” The apartment itself was noted to be\n“located on an upper floor [on the] West side of the complex.” (Gov’t Ex. 1 at 2) Deputy\nKlunder included the following paragraph in support of his belief that probable cause\nexisted to support a search warrant for the apartment:\nFACTS OF WHICH I HAVE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE:\n(Provide as many detailed FACTS – not opinions o[r]\nconclusions – as possible which indicate why this property is\nsubject to a search warrant.)\nLarry Dean Jones Jr. was arrested on 9/11/04 with a large\nquantity of suspected methamphetamine in his possession,\nalong with numerous items of drug paraphernalia, including\npipes, scales, baggies, and other items. Jones also had\npackaging, consistent with the sale of illegal drugs. The\nsuspected methamphetamine has tested positive with a field\ntest kit. Jones was arrested during a traffic stop in the area of\n6th St. S.W. and S. Monroe. Jones was driving his 1997\nPontiac Grand Prix, bearing IA license [number inserted]. 6Jones is being charged with possession with intent to deliver\nmethamphetamine, failure to affix drug tax stamp, and\npossession of drug paraphernalia.\nSee attachments 1, 2, 3, 4.\nId.\nAttachment 1 was Deputy Klunder’s typewritten report from the traffic stop and\nJones’s arrest. Among other things, the officer indicated the following in the report: “We\nhave received information that Jones also deals drugs out of his residence, located at [the\napartment specified in the warrant application] in Mason City. . . . It is believed that\nthere are more drugs and illegal items at Jones’[s] residence.” ( Id. at 8) Further\nattachments included copies of three citations issued to Jones: one for posse ssion of\nmethamphetamine with intent to deliver (id. at 9); one for failure to affix a tax stamp (id.\nat 10); and one for possession of drug paraphernalia ( id. at 11). The citations issued to\nJones for the traffic violations were not attached to the warrant application.\nThe application and attachments were presented to a state magistrate, who had\nDeputy Klunder swear to the truth of the matters contained in the application packet. (See\nDoc. No. 37) The magistrate found probable cause existed and issued the search warrant.\nIn the issuing magistrate’s endorsement to the application, under “Abstract of\nTestimony,” the magistrate indicated, in his own handwriting, “As set out in Application\nand attachments incorporated herein by reference.” Id. at 6.\nDeputy Klunder and other officers executed the warrant at the apartment. They\nlocated a safe, a large amount of cash, approximately two ounces of methamphetamine,\nsome other drugs, and various items of paraphernalia. 7II. DISCUSSION\nJones moves to suppress the evidence found during the traffic stop and during the\nsearch of his residence. He argues Deputy Klunder’s detention of him at the scene of the\ntraffic stop was unlawful, the officers performed an unlawful search incident to his arrest,\nthe search warrant application and resulting warrant were defective, and the exclusionary\nrule does not save the illegal search pursuant to the defective warrant. ( See Doc. Nos.\n15 & 20)\nA. The Traffic Stop\nJones argues it was unlawful for Deputy Klunder to detain him at the scene of the\ntraffic stop after the officer had completed his investigation of the window tint and\nverified that Jones had a valid driver’s license and registration. He argues the officer\nlacked “reasonable or probable cause . . . or any other legal justification” to detain him\nfor the “minor traffic code violations,” and the fact that he did so violated Jones’s\nconstitutional rights. (Doc. No. 15 at ¶ 3(a)) He further argues the officers’ search of his\nvehicle incident to his arrest was unlawful because Deputy Klunder’s own report indicates\nhis decision to arrest Jones was based on Jones’s failure to consent to a search of his\nvehicle. ( Id. at ¶ 3(b))\nIt is well settled that “[a]ny traffic violation, even a minor one, gives an officer\nprobable cause to stop the violator.” United States v. Lyton , 161 F.3d 1168, 1170 (8th\nCir. 1998). The officer’s belief that Jones’s window tint violated Iowa law constituted\nprobable cause for him to stop Jones and investigate. Id. The traffic stop was valid even\nif it was pretextual and the officer would have ignored the window tint violation absent\nhis suspicion that Jones might be engaged in illegal activities. United States v. Gomez\nSerena , 368 F.3d 1037, 1041 (8th Cir. 2004) (citing Whren v. United States , 517 U.S. 8806, 813, 116 S. Ct. 1769, 1774, 135 L. Ed. 2d 89 (1996)); United States v. Caldwell ,\n97 F.3d 1063, 1067 (8th Cir. 1996) (citing United States v. Thomas , 93 F.3d 479, 485\n(8th Cir. 1996)).\nThe officer then asked questions reasonably related to the stop, including asking\nfor Jones’s driver’s license, vehicle registration, and insurance card. See Lyton , 161 F.3d\nat 1170. When Jones’s behavior caused the officer to become suspicious that Jones might\nbe involved in criminal activity, the officer was entitled to expand the scope of the stop\nand to detain Jones for a reasonable time to investigate further. Id. (citing United States\nv. Ramos , 42 F.3d 1160, 1163 (8th Cir. 1994); United States v. Johnson , 58 F.3d 356,\n358 (8th Cir. 1995)).\nThe question is “[w]hether the particular facts known to the officer amount[ed] to\nan objective and particularized basis for a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.”\nUnited States v. Beck, 140 F.3d 1129, 1136 (8th Cir. 1998) (Bennett, J., sitting by\ndesignation). In this case, the officer had observed Jones acting in what, in the officer’s\nexperience, was an unusual manner. Jones had exited his vehicle immediately upon being\nstopped, and when he was asked for permission to search his vehicle, Jones reached into\nthe back seat and pulled out a few items, stating that was all he had in the vehicle. Jones\nhad declined the officer’s requests that he look in the glove box for his registration and\ninsurance card. Jones’s hands were shaking and he appeared nervous. He became more\nnervous when he was told the drug dog was coming, and before he exited his vehicle, he\nrolled up all the windows.\nFurthermore, Jones failed to produce a driver’s license, a vehicle registration, or\nan insurance verification. Despite the fact that the officer was able to verify Jones had\na valid driver’s license and the vehicle was registered to him, Jones’s failure to have these\nitems available in the vehicle violated Iowa law. See Iowa Code § 321.20B (failure to 9provide proof of financial liability coverage justifies issuance of citation, removal of\nvehicle’s license plates, and impoundment of vehicle); § 321.32 (registration card must\nbe carried in vehicle to which it refers at all times, and be shown to officer upon request);\n§ 321.98 (violation of registration provision is simple misdemeanor);§ 321.174 (driver\nmust have license “in immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle\nand shall display the same, upon demand of . . . a peace officer”).\nAll of these facts caused Deputy Klunder’s suspicion to grow over the course of\nthe traffic stop, and provided him with a particularized, objectiv e basis for suspecting\nwrongdoing, justifying detention of Jones for a reasonable time to investigate further. See\nUnited States v. Yang, 345 F.3d 650, 656 (citing United States v. Linkous , 285 F.3d 716,\n720 (8th Cir. 2002)); United States v. Ameling , 328 F.3d 443, 447-48 (8th Cir. 2003).\nEven if Jones’s “individual actions might be innocently explained, his behavior must be\nconsidered as a whole and in the light of the officers’ experience and specialized\ntraining.” Yang, 345 F.3d at 655 (quoting Ameling, supra ) (internal quotations marks\nomitted). As the Eighth Circuit observed in Yang, “The Supreme Court has said\nrepeatedly that courts must look at the totality of the circumstances when deciding\nwhether there was reasonable suspicion supporting an investigatory detention.” Yang,\n345 F.3d at 655 (citing United States v. Arvizu , 534 U.S. 266, 273, 122 S. Ct. 744, 750,\n151 L. Ed. 2d 740 (2002)). \nUnder these circumstances, the court finds Deputy Klunder had a reasonable\nsuspicion that Jones might be transporting illegal drugs, warranting a brief detention until\nthe drug dog arrived. See Yang , 345 F.3d at 656. Even though the drug dog failed to\nalert on the vehicle, the officers could arrest Jones for the misdemeanor traffic violations,\nand then search the vehicle incident to his arrest. “‘If an officer has probable cause to\nbelieve that an individual has committed even a very minor criminal offense in his 10presence, he may, without violating the Fourth Amendment, arrest the offender.”’ United\nStates V. Orozco-Castillo , 404 F.3d 1101, 1103 (8th Cir. 2005) (quoting Atwater v. City\nof Lago Vista , 532 U.S. 318, 354, 121 S. Ct. 1536, 1557, 149 L. Ed. 2d 549 (2001)).\nHaving made a lawful custodial arrest of Jones, the officers then could search the\npassenger compartment of his vehicle incident to that arrest. Caldwell , 97 F.3d at 1067\n(citing New York v. Belton , 453 U.S. 454, 460, 101 S. Ct. 2860, 2864, 69 L. Ed. 2d 768\n(1981)). The passenger compartment includes the vehicle’s glove box. United States v.\nMcCrady , 774 F.2d 868, 871-72 (8th Cir. 1985). After the officers found illegal drugs\nand paraphernalia in the vehicle, they had probable cause to extend their search to the\nentire vehicle, including the trunk.\nB. The Search Warrant\nJones argues the search warrant application and the magistrate’s accompanying\nendorsement were defective because they failed to set forth “grounds or information to\nsupport a nexus between criminal activity or evidence, and the targeted apartment in\nMason City.” (Doc. No. 20 at 7) Jones has failed to raise issues regarding the veracity\nof the statements in the warrant application to justify an analysis under Franks v.\nDelaware , 438 U.S. 154, 98 S. Ct. 2674, 57 L. Ed. 2d 667 (1978). Accordingly, the\nwarrant application and search warrant must be evaluated based on the four corners of\nthe documents. \nThe United States Supreme Court has set the standar d for review of a search\nwarrant application, as follows:\n[W]e have repeatedly said that after-the-fact scrutiny by\ncourts of the sufficiency of an affidavit should not take the\nform of de novo review. A magistrate’s “determination of\nprobable cause should be paid great deference by reviewing 11courts.” Spinelli [v. United States,] 309 U.S. [410,] 419, 89\nS. Ct. [1509,] 590[, 21 L. Ed. 2d 637 (1969)]. “A grudging\nor negative attitude by reviewing courts toward warrants,”\n[United States v.] Ventresca , 380 U.S. [102,] 108, 85 S. Ct.\n[741,] 745, [13 L. Ed. 2d 684 (1965)], is inconsistent with the\nFourth Amendment’s strong prefer ence for searches\nconducted pursuant to a warrant [and] “courts should not\ninvalidate . . . warrant[s] by interpreting affidavit[s] in a\nhypertechnical, rather than a commonsense, manner.” Id.,\n[380 U.S.] at 109, 85 S. Ct. at 746.\n. . . . Reflecting this preference for the warrant\nprocess, the traditional standard for review of an issuing\nmagistrate’s probable cause determination has been that so\nlong as the magistrate had a “substantial basis for . . .\nconclud[ing]” that a search would uncover evidence of\nwrongdoing, the Fourth Amendment requires no more. Jones\nv. United States , 362 U.S. 257, 271, 80 S. Ct. 725, 736, 4\nL. Ed. 2d 697 (1960). See United States v. Harris , 403 U.S.\n573, 577-583, 91 S. Ct. 2075, 2079-2082, 29 L. Ed. 2d 723\n(1971). [FN10]\n[FN10] We also have said that “Although in a particular case\nit may not be easy to determine when an affidavit\ndemonstrates the existence of probable cause, the resolution\nof doubtful or marginal cases in this area should be largely\ndetermined by the preference to be accorded to warrants,”\nVentresca , supra, 380 U.S. at 109, 85 S. Ct. at 746. This\nreflects both a desire to encourage use of the warrant process\nby police officers and a recognition that once a warrant has\nbeen obtained, intrusion upon interests protected by the\nFourth Amendment is less severe than otherwise may be the\ncase.\nIllinois v. Gates , 462 U.S. 213, 236-37 & n.10, 103 S. Ct. 2317 & n.10, 2331, 76 L. Ed.\n2d 527 (1983). 12Thus, the scope of this court’s review of the search warrant in this case is limited\nto a determination of whethe r the magistrate had a “substantial basis” to issue the\nwarrant. In conducting this review, the court is mindful that\naffidavits “are normally drafted by nonlawyers in the midst\nand haste of a criminal investigation. Technical requirements\nof elaborate specificity once exacted under common law have\nno proper place in this area.” Ventresca, supra , 380 U.S. at\n108, 85 S. Ct. at 745. . . . [M]any warrants are – quite\nproperly . . . issued on the basis of nontechnical, common-\nsense judgment of laymen applying a standard less demanding\nthan those used in more formal legal proceedings.\nGates , 462 U.S. at 235-36, 103 S. Ct. at 2331. As the Supreme Court further explained:\nThe task of the issuing magistrate is simply to make a\npractical, common-sense decision whether, given all the\ncircumstances set forth in the affidavit before him, including\nthe “veracity” and “basis of knowledge” of persons supplying\nhearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband\nor evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.\nAnd the duty of a reviewing court is simply to ensure that the\nmagistrate had a “substantial basis for . . . conclud[ing]” that\nprobable cause existed. Jones v. United States, 362 U.S.\n[257,] 271, 80 S. Ct. [725,] 736[, 4 L. Ed. 2d 697 (1960)].\nWe are convinced that this flexible, easily applied standa rd\nwill better achieve the accommodation of public and private\ninterests that the Fourth Amendment requires than does [the\nprior legal standard].\nGates , 462 U.S. at 238-39, 103 S. Ct. at 2332. See also United States v. Fulgham , 143\nF.3d 399, 400-01 (8th Cir. 1998) (“When we review the suffici ency of an affidavit\nsupporting a search warrant, great deference is accorded the issuing judicial officer. See\nUnited States v. Day , 949 F.2d 973, 977 (8th Cir. 1991).”)\nApplying this deferential standard to the warrant application in this case reveals\na substantial basis for the magistrate’s probable cause determination. The warrant 13application, including the attachments, indicated officers had the following information\nupon which to base probable cause for issuance of the warrant: (1) officers had received\na tip that Jones was selling drugs from his residen ce and his car; (2) in the search of\nJones’s vehicle inciden t to his arrest, officers found a quantity of drugs and drug\nparaphernalia, including, among other things, packaging materi als and a drug scale;\n(3) Jones had prior convictions for drug offenses; (4) Jones had attempted to conceal the\nfact that he was transporting drugs in his car by use of a strong air freshener; (5) Jones\nhad a police scanner in his car; and (6) Jones acted nervous and evasive during the traffic\nstop. (See Gov’t Ex. 1 at 8) The court finds these facts were legally sufficient to support\nthe magistrate’s probable cause determination and issuance of the warrant. “Viewing the\naffidavit in a common sense manner, we cannot say that the issuing judge did not have\na substantial basis to believe that the items sought in the warrant would be found at [the\ndefendant’s] residence.” United States v. Searcy , 181 F.3d 975, 981 (8th Cir. 1999).\nBecause the warrant was valid on its face, there is no need to conduct an analysis\nunder United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S. Ct. 3405, 82 L. Ed. 2d 677 (1984).\nHowe ver, were such an analysis to be performed, this court would find the officers\nexecuting the warrant relied in good faith on the magistrate’s probable cause\ndetermination in executing the warrant. See Leon, supra .\nIII. CONCLUSION\nFor the reasons discussed above, IT IS RESPECTFULLY RECOMMENDED,\nunless any party files objections to this Report and Recommendation as specified below,\nthat the defendants’ motion to dismiss or strike be denied . 14\nAny party who objects to this report and recommendation must serve and file\nspecific, written objections by no later than June 8, 2005 . Any response to the\nobjections must be served and filed by June 13, 2005 .\nIT IS SO ORDERED.\nDATED this 1st day of June, 2005.\nPAUL A. ZOSS\nMAGISTRATE JUDGE\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT" }

[ -0.10069046169519424, -0.013219376094639301, 0.06705346703529358, 0.0019880575127899647, 0.008734667673707008, -0.07888776063919067, -0.04307391121983528, 0.039686258882284164, -0.0448763482272625, -0.031941138207912445, -0.016584904864430428, -0.023694461211562157, -0.03962208330631256, -0.02829335629940033, 0.021727215498685837, 0.03458629921078682, 0.04090040922164917, -0.04943770915269852, -0.0050189439207315445, -0.023897593840956688, -0.03343122452497482, -0.08402050286531448, 0.060192618519067764, -0.07797344028949738, -0.008357536979019642, -0.03132833540439606, -0.06317677348852158, -0.0668182522058487, 0.006278989836573601, -0.0946454256772995, 0.041939523071050644, -0.020014706999063492, -0.02500050887465477, -0.015613643452525139, 0.06820216029882431, 0.037498679012060165, 0.04087110981345177, -0.08456798642873764, -0.024614928290247917, 0.038716308772563934, 0.04674624651670456, -0.05132560431957245, -0.03994166478514671, -0.02889261208474636, 0.002968772081658244, -0.036155931651592255, 0.013838880695402622, -0.06734006851911545, -0.028255539014935493, -0.00793942715972662, -0.036838844418525696, -0.08255380392074585, 0.07816396653652191, 0.0031841378659009933, 0.009821287356317043, 0.03478830307722092, -0.062484681606292725, -0.0756334736943245, 0.02671043947339058, -0.011370481923222542, 0.005972425453364849, -0.026966102421283722, -0.09430357813835144, -0.03935537487268448, 0.0645161122083664, 0.015552953816950321, -0.04654061049222946, -0.011851189658045769, 0.03153427690267563, -0.0006535277934744954, -0.011826684698462486, 0.03247799724340439, -0.08297430723905563, -0.08486402779817581, -0.027595151215791702, 0.03165135905146599, 0.04801151901483536, 0.03261718153953552, 0.0777769610285759, -0.043590787798166275, 0.041922345757484436, -0.05400219187140465, -0.0725570023059845, 0.002095733769237995, -0.025967029854655266, -0.028603684157133102, -0.08012370020151138, 0.04046780243515968, 0.04509161785244942, -0.027513662353157997, 0.02344021014869213, -0.05079378932714462, 0.0008700035978108644, 0.034147489815950394, 0.001060186536051333, 0.048692092299461365, 0.03188176453113556, 0.0052628666162490845, -0.048680372536182404, 0.07441238313913345, 0.09485951066017151, 0.03676726669073105, -0.025863688439130783, 0.012226462364196777, -0.032001469284296036, -0.004503040574491024, 0.03736554831266403, 0.05399738997220993, 0.06461109220981598, 0.01779923029243946, -0.03233692795038223, 0.012458299286663532, -0.04461151361465454, -0.0943145826458931, 0.003131381468847394, 0.00935401115566492, -0.0689537525177002, 0.048275869339704514, -0.02120083197951317, -0.07125810533761978, -0.028174886479973793, 0.05105327442288399, -0.06184731796383858, 0.09402377158403397, 0.0646517276763916, 0.06824658066034317, -0.044411297887563705, 1.3868595492332615e-32, 0.06198911741375923, 0.06656758487224579, 0.02833835780620575, -0.02098090946674347, -0.021652234718203545, 0.08747933059930801, -0.02911185473203659, 0.045578524470329285, -0.11761028319597244, -0.07542576640844345, -0.05402320623397827, -0.02724912203848362, -0.024462882429361343, 0.04660630226135254, 0.04349495843052864, -0.05726025626063347, 0.11932896077632904, -0.0053545390255749226, -0.016912396997213364, 0.09745954722166061, 0.049277812242507935, -0.05703934282064438, -0.05405568331480026, 0.04401281476020813, 0.04130721837282181, 0.035604916512966156, 0.06724238395690918, -0.035903021693229675, -0.059622857719659805, 0.022671664133667946, 0.021497678011655807, 0.014948018826544285, -0.01830950938165188, 0.03276681527495384, 0.025021888315677643, -0.01777578517794609, -0.03385142236948013, 0.01655120775103569, -0.08997204899787903, -0.02983694337308407, 0.01178724318742752, 0.08187377452850342, -0.045085608959198, -0.021646471694111824, 0.02927916683256626, -0.03744422644376755, 0.07496998459100723, 0.053984563797712326, 0.11393546313047409, 0.035653967410326004, 0.011147046461701393, -0.022670865058898926, -0.13245046138763428, 0.011720480397343636, 0.10554976016283035, 0.04295401647686958, 0.03723599761724472, 0.031030403450131416, 0.03198256343603134, -0.004994780756533146, 0.03646811470389366, -0.035575613379478455, 0.025488201528787613, -0.013107865117490292, -0.0170072540640831, 0.12020387500524521, 0.007116955704987049, 0.047872625291347504, -0.004575127735733986, 0.04128188639879227, -0.05352151021361351, 0.057606685906648636, 0.08039426803588867, -0.010394920594990253, 0.0940508022904396, 0.011552860029041767, -0.04873960092663765, -0.006126068066805601, 0.051132313907146454, 0.05045883357524872, -0.10392282158136368, -0.03167023882269859, 0.041673704981803894, -0.009299002587795258, -0.09528575837612152, -0.024389300495386124, 0.07596492767333984, 0.10148756951093674, -0.02947872132062912, -0.011523770168423653, 0.01347524393349886, -0.03310003504157066, 0.04722413420677185, -0.0368478000164032, -0.1122359111905098, -1.2162820946175008e-32, 0.03508049249649048, 0.008023813366889954, -0.08353022485971451, -0.02884240448474884, 0.000613231270108372, 0.021399831399321556, 0.030137833207845688, 0.08631093055009842, 0.009213646873831749, -0.043929897248744965, -0.03310207277536392, 0.0018568718805909157, 0.07542073726654053, -0.12068425118923187, 0.024507811293005943, 0.0021255849860608578, -0.029861479997634888, -0.018035126850008965, 0.027109283953905106, 0.010846227407455444, 0.011325574479997158, 0.0451706200838089, -0.051128193736076355, 0.04404608905315399, -0.0016944122035056353, 0.07895968854427338, 0.04373657703399658, -0.03224568068981171, -0.04633111134171486, -0.022825531661510468, -0.12221668660640717, 0.05015876144170761, -0.04665016010403633, 0.02368093654513359, 0.0033177575096488, 0.06692960113286972, 0.016793537884950638, 0.02578767202794552, -0.024691661819815636, -0.008990521542727947, 0.003735615173354745, 0.04411846399307251, 0.04437169432640076, -0.0046098800376057625, 0.011988735757768154, 0.016158709302544594, -0.04288647323846817, 0.04155007004737854, 0.01955787092447281, 0.03203348070383072, -0.06466948986053467, -0.03708391636610031, -0.041855230927467346, 0.08038486540317535, 0.011316407471895218, 0.022738030180335045, -0.02062581665813923, 0.03174916282296181, -0.010042858310043812, -0.04748838394880295, -0.004001910798251629, -0.039156340062618256, 0.053066011518239975, 0.08069180697202682, -0.011305277235805988, -0.024396812543272972, -0.02162131853401661, 0.1159459725022316, -0.01359278243035078, 0.01134648360311985, 0.005142020992934704, 0.006274735555052757, 0.035873375833034515, -0.0157012976706028, 0.04485486447811127, 0.0510009303689003, -0.021690143272280693, -0.03649204224348068, 0.03763813152909279, -0.024204369634389877, -0.07692587375640869, 0.07653883844614029, -0.08243527263402939, 0.0030571608804166317, 0.08355521410703659, -0.00952808279544115, 0.027007846161723137, -0.0873507410287857, 0.007200358901172876, -0.04034058749675751, -0.012264972552657127, 0.002044811611995101, -0.03623761609196663, 0.07651479542255402, 0.04315818473696709, -6.205956282201441e-8, 0.07272207736968994, 0.0382690466940403, -0.042449645698070526, 0.03393601253628731, 0.02282669208943844, -0.11693020910024643, -0.051342252641916275, 0.05309281870722771, -0.019095944240689278, 0.009399103932082653, 0.05835616961121559, -0.05204847827553749, -0.018965283408761024, -0.06182802468538284, 0.047973137348890305, -0.04655750095844269, 0.029155926778912544, -0.036319177597761154, -0.04714449122548103, 0.012277254834771156, -0.02070474810898304, 0.04023110494017601, 0.044971220195293427, -0.06289470940828323, 0.006543674040585756, 0.03763807192444801, 0.02472115494310856, 0.018001334741711617, 0.05024244636297226, -0.09002365916967392, -0.03721195459365845, -0.026099570095539093, 0.039880815893411636, -0.08048231899738312, 0.05742421746253967, 0.02237851358950138, -0.14940840005874634, 0.005373669322580099, 0.07952447980642319, 0.06451696157455444, -0.03918822482228279, -0.045163944363594055, 0.032733187079429626, 0.02328704483807087, -0.029323149472475052, -0.02685050666332245, 0.035468023270368576, -0.10616331547498703, 0.018433112651109695, 0.09200811386108398, -0.06931134313344955, -0.015944326296448708, -0.015390344895422459, -0.04849698767066002, -0.006314891390502453, 0.12761573493480682, -0.008724997751414776, -0.03618848696351051, -0.06803695112466812, 0.049910660833120346, 0.1065836176276207, -0.08312279731035233, -0.15467648208141327, 0.02227691374719143 ]

{ "pdf_file": "TNAEWETY6GEU5CQUNT74ABIGQKQEXLTU.pdf", "text": "Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay FranceLarge Photomultipliers\nfor the next\nAstroparticle Physics Experiments\nChallenges and consequences on the associated electronics Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayUHCR (Ultra High energy cosmic ray)\nPierre Auger Observatory (Argentina)\nVery high dynamic range Low after pulse ratePhotodetectors - Requirements\nFuture\nAUGER\nNorth site (Colorado) \nBNL 02/25/2008 [Dumand (Hawaï)]\nBaikal Lake (Russia)\nANTARES (France)NESTOR (Greece)\nNEMO (Italy)\nJoël Pouthas IPN OrsayDeep underwater neutrino telescopes\nAMANDA / Ice Cube (South Pole)\nLarge area\nwith maximum efficiency\nGood SER\n(Single electron response)\nin charge and time\nAntaresPhotodetectors - Requirements\nFuture\nKM3 Net (Mediteraneen Sea)\nDeployment\nIce Cube (South Pole)\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayNucleon decay and neutrino detectors\nSNO (Canada)\nMiniBooNE (USA)\nBorexino (Italie)\nSuper KamiokandeKamiokaNDE\nSuper KamiokaNDE\nKamLAND\n(Japon)\nLarge area\nwith maximum efficiency\nGood SER\n(Single electron response)\nin charge and time\nLow noisePhotodetectors - Requirements\nFuture\nUNO\nHyper Kamiokande\nMemphys\n10 to 20 times Super K\n200 000 to 300 000\nLarge PMTs !!!\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayStart with AUGER Surface Detectors\nPMT : PHOTONIS XP 1805 (9’’)\nBase design : IPN Orsay (End of 2000)\nProduction : 5000 pieces (2001-2005)\nPhotonis, IPN Orsay, INFN TorinoIPN Orsay / Photonis Collaboration \nContinue with R&D Program on large Photomultipliers\nYear 1 (Sept 03-Sept 04)\nDefinition and construction of the test benches\nValidation on reference PMTs\nYear 2 (Sept 04-Sept 05)\nConstruction and measurements on different PMTs (5”,8”,9”,10”)Photocathode characterization. Afterpulse measurements\nYear 3 (Sept 05-Sept 06)\nEnd of measurements on standard PMT \nAfterpulse studies : detailed simulations and measurements\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayIPN Orsay / Photonis Collaboration \nSingle electron response\n(SER and P/V)\nTiming characteristics\nPhotocathode uniformity\nDetection efficiency (relative)Test Bench 1\nLight Source\n241Am+NE111 or LED\n(Ref PMT : XP2020)\nMobil carriage\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayIPN Orsay / Photonis Collaboration \nClimat cabinet\n(Voestch VC4034)\n+ Black box (Al)\n(-40° à +50° )Black box\n(Wood)Noise\nAfter pulses\nVariation with temperature\nMagnetic field effects\nData Acquisition\nCAMAC\nOscilloscope\nMATAC (2GHz, 12bits)Test Bench 2\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayIPN Orsay / Photonis Overview on results\nImproved photocathode\n051015202530\n7,5\n8\n8,5\n9\n9,5\n10\n10,5\n11\n11,5\n12\n12,5\nCorning blue photocathode sensitivity (uA/lmF)occurrencestandard tubes\n051015202530\n7,5\n8\n8,5\n9\n9,5\n10\n10,5\n11\n11,5\n12\n12,5\nCorning Blue photocathode sensitivity (uA/lmF)occurrencestandard tubes\nimproved process\n0510152025\n30\n40\n50\n60\n70\n80\n90\n100\n11\n0\n120\n130\n140\n150\nWhite photocathode sensitivity (uA/lm)occurrencestandard tubes\n0510152025\n30\n40\n50\n60\n70\n80\n90\n100\n110\n120\n130\n140\n150\nWhite photocathode sensitivity (uA/lm)occurencestandard tubes\nimproved process\nIncrease of Sk CB: ~19%\nIncrease of Sk White: ~42%Standard (~800 PMTs)\nSk CB: 9.32 μA/lmF\nSk White: 68. 37 μA/lm\nImproved (~25 PMTs)\nSk CB: 11.35 μA/lmF\nSk White: 118.00 μA/lmBlue measurement (C orning Blue filter) \nWhite measurementXP1805 (9’’, AUGER PMT)D. Dornic et al, Beaune Conf erence, France, June 2005\nNucl. Instr. and Meth. A567 (2006) 527\nBNL 02/25/2008 charge (ADC)250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340count\n00.511.522.53adc1_015\nJoël Pouthas IPN OrsayIPN Orsay / Photonis Overview on results\nImproved photocathode\nControl by\nPulse measurements in SER\n(Relative detection efficiency)Quantum efficiency (400 nm)\nStandard ~26%\nImproved ~32%\nThreshold (pe)0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9counting rate (%)\n1.21.41.61.822.2sn 4751/HP\nsn 4753/HP\nsn 5311/HP\nsn 5368/std\nsn 5371/std\nsn 5372/std\n~16% StandardImproved\ntemperature (àC)-10 0 10 20 30counting rate (kHz)\n05101520\nstandard\nimprovedDrawbacks ?\nDark count rate\nSame at low temperature\nIncrease with temperature\nBNL 02/25/2008D. Dornic et al, Beaune Conf erence, France, June 2005\nNucl. Instr. and Meth. A567 (2006) 527 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayIPN Orsay / Photonis Overview on results\nAfter-pulses\nDigital Oscilloscope + PC\n100 ns to 20 µs\nSampling : 0.5 GSPS500 Events/s\ndifference entre le pic 1 et le pic 2 (ns)1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 100000510152025303540diff12\nBackground noiseTime distribution\n2D : Amplitude versus time\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayIPN Orsay / Photonis Overview on results\nAfter-pulses\nTime distribution\n2D : Amplitude versus time\nSeuil (pe)0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1. 2Taux de post-impulsions (% )\n123456Rate versus p.e.\n0.2 1 0.6\n0.3 p.e\n1 p.e\n2 p.e\nBNL 02/25/2008 0510152025\n-25 -15 -5 5 15 25 355 pouces (XP1803 n°865)\n8 pouces (XP1806 n°869)\n10 pouces (XP1804 n°885)Noise (kHz)\nTemperature (°C)5\"8\"10\"IPN Orsay / Photonis Overview on results\nJoël Pouthas IPN OrsayNoise (dark pulses)\nAll the main results in\nPhD of D. Dornic , 09 – 29 - 060,05,010,015,020,025,0\n0,0 100,0 200,0 300,0 400,0 500,0 600,0 700,0Noise (kHz)\nPhotocathode surface (cm2)T= 30°\n0,00,51,01,52,02,5\n0,0 50,0 100,0 150,0 200,0Noise (kHz)\nWindow glass volume (cm3)T= -5°\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayRequirements on photodetectors\ngenerally ask for the best characteristics\nBut…\n…parameters are often correlated…\n…A n d\na hierarchy with priorities\n(coming out from impact on physics)\nmust be introduced\nin the requirements to manufacturersFirst remark\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayIPN Orsay / Photonis Collaboration \nNew 3 years R&D Program (2006 – 2009)\nStandard PMTs\nPhotocathode\nScint\nPMT\nPhotocathode\nHybrid PMTs\n“Smart Tube” type (Scintillator)\nComparison with standard PMT\n(Same size, 10’’ or 12”)More detailed studies on :\nSER (Single Electron Response)\n‘’Late pulses’’ (T < 100 ns) with a laser\nEnd of the ‘’scaling’’ studies\nParameter correlations (5 ” to 12”) , ( No 15”)\nNew types of multipliers\nR&D for Memphys\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayBaikal neutrino experiment \nFirst developments (1983)\n\"SMART Tube\"\nPhilips XP 2600Dumand project & Baikal\nScintillator\nP\nM\nTpe\n20 - 30 keVPhotocathode\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayBaikal neutrino experiment \nFirst developments (1983)\n\"SMART Tube\"\nPhilips XP 2600\nDumand project & Baikal\nThen in Russia\nBaikal experiment\nQuasar 300 ; Quasar 350\nQuasar 370\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayBaikal neutrino experiment \nQuasar 370\nConventional PMT (UGON) Glass bulb\nPhotocathode (SbKCs)\nAcceleration PE (25 kV)\nScintillator (YSO)\nLarge area\nGood SER (Gain 1st stage : 25)Good TTS : 2.5 ns (FWHM)Characteristics\nBNL 02/25/2008 In collaboration with European Labs\nJoël Pouthas IPN OrsaySMART Tube @ Photonis\nStatus\nPhilips/Photonis invested 1 M€ and made ~30 pieces\n200 Quasars operating for many years -> Proof of life time\nNo ongoing production !C. Marmonier, NNN05, France, April 2005\nLIGHT06, Israel, January 2006\nOn-going R&D\nReproduce and improve former tubes\nRedesign\nBetter scintillator (LSO:Ce, YAP:Ce, ZnO:Ga, LaCl3…)\nMulti-anode multiplier (rough localization)\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayHPD Team @ CERN \nC. Joram et al., CERN-PH-EP/2006-025, August 2006\nNucl. Instr. and Meth. A581 (2007) 469\nThe X-HPD – Conceptual Study of a\nLarge Spherical Hybrid Photodetector\nBNL 02/25/2008\n“Artistic view” of\nthe half-scale prototype Cubic scintillator\n+\nSmall PMT Prototype (208 mm glass envelope)\nJoël Pouthas IPN OrsayHPD Team @ CERN \nThe X-HPD – Conceptual Study of a\nLarge Spherical Hybrid Photodetector\nCubic metal anode\nTest bench for scintillators\nLSO crystal\n(SER)\nBNL 02/25/2008C. Joram et al., CERN-PH-EP/2006-025, August 2006\nNucl. Instr. and Meth. A581 (2007) 469 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayHybrid Photon Detector (HPD)\nPhotonis-DEP\n \nPhocathode (18 mm usefull)Silicon PIN diode\n(2 mm diameter)\nFocussing electrodes(Total HV : - 15 kV)\nExcellent photon resolution\n(Very good SER)\nLow gain : 3500 @ 15 kV\n(needs low noise electronics)\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay\n5’’ prototypeHAPD @ Hamamatsu \n13’’ prototype\nVery good SER\nVery good timing\nBut … still weak signals\nBNL 02/25/2008Replace the PIN by an APDH. Nakayama, Beaune Conference, France, June 2005\nNucl. Instr. and Meth. A567 (2006) 172 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayAll ideas on\nphotodetection designs are certainly interesting\nBut…\n…if a mass production is foreseen\nConstraints from industry\nmust be considered from the beginningSecond remark\nBNL 02/25/2008Particularly on the costs Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayCost approach\nPhotonis at NNN05C. Marmonier, NNN05, France, April 2005\nLIGHT06, Israel, January 2006\nSize (Diameter) 20 20(17) 12 Inch\nPhotocathode area 1660 1450 615 cm2\nQuantum efficiency 20 20 24 %\nCollection efficiency 60 60 70 %\nCost 2500 2500 800 €\n12.6 14.4 7.7 € /PEU/cm2\nCost/cm2per useful photoelectron\nCost / (cm2 x QE x CE)\n12\" is better in SER and timing 12\" provides a higher granularity\nBut, the number of channels is increased\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayR&D program for Memphys\n“PMm2” (2006 – 2009) , granted by the ANR (National Agency for Research)\nHuge amount of\nvery large photodetectors\n(PMTs of 20” size)Megaton water tanks\nProposition\nReplace large PMTs (20”)\nby groups of smallerones (12”)\nIntegrated electronics\n(Multichannel, close to the PMTs)LAL Orsay, IPN Orsay, LAPP Annecy and Photonis\nBNL 02/25/2008 Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayElectronics\n„Variable gain to equalize photomultipliers response and operate with a \ncommon high voltage\n„High speed discriminator for Auto Trigger (100 % efficiency @ 1/3 pe)\n„Digitization of charge (Dynamic range up to 300 pe ?)\n„Digitization of time of arrival (Resolution 1 ns)\n„Common Data out Front-end requirements\nBNL 02/25/2008R&D program PMm2\n“No possible \nlocal coincidence”\n(low energy event\n10PMs/MeV over 81000 PMTs)\n⇓\nTRIGGER LESS Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay BNL 02/25/2008DAQ GPS receiverEthernet switches + server “Outside”PMm2Electronics\nTwisted pairs cables for\nClock Synchronization\nDigitized Data\nPower\n~4 m2\nFPGA + µCFE-ASIC Monitoring\nNetwork ControllerHV“Local” (16 channels)“No possible \nlocal coincidence”\n(low energy event\n10PMs/MeV over 81000 PMTs)\n⇓\nTRIGGER LESS Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayPMT 64 ch. Readout (OPERA)\nVariable gain (0-4, 5 bits)\nCharge multiplexed output (0.1-100 pe)\n32 channels chip, 180 mW2000 chips\nAMS 0.8 µm\nLAL Orsay\nBNL 02/25/2008FEE Electronics\nMicro Electronics ASIC\nPMT 64 ch. Readout (ATLAS Luminometer)\nVariable gain (0-4, 6 bits)\nCharge multiplexed output (0.1-100 pe)64 channels chip, 500 mW\n3 thresholds\nAMS SiGe 0.35 µm\n Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay BNL 02/25/2008FEE Electronics\nMicro Electronics ASIC\nOrsay Micro Electronic Group Associated\n2006 MAROC2\nATLAS\nLuminometer\nPMT\n64 channels\n2006 HARDROC\nILC Calorimeter\nCALICE\nRPC DHCAL\n64 channels\n2007 SPIROC\nILC Calorimeter\nCALICE\nAHCAL\n36 channels Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay BNL 02/25/2008PMm2Electronics\nMicro Electronics ASIC\nCRRC2\nSlow Shaper\n(50, 100,\n200 ns)\nFast Shaper\n(15ns)Track\n& hold\nDiscriVariable Gain\nAmplifier\n(1-5)\nDAC\n10 bitsdelay\nBandgapVref\nSSHVref\nFSHVrefSSH\nHold12 bits\nADC\nRamp\nTDC24 bits\nCounter\n10 MHzAbsolute timeInputs\nX 16Charge\nSerial\n16x12bits\nTime\nSerial\n16x(8÷10) bits\nGain correction\n(4bits)Threshold\n(10bits)Slow control signals\n Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay BNL 02/25/2008PMm2Electronics\nPower, Clock, DATA Transmissions\n LAPP Annecy\nCable 100 m (Twisted pairs)\nEye diagram\ndT(Rx-Tx) Front montant horloge\n300350400450500550600650700750800\n0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35\nFréquence (MHz)Histo largeur (ps)Clock stabilityFirst tests on DATA and Clock transmission Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay BNL 02/25/2008\nPMm2Photomultipliers Integration\nParameter correlation studies\nSignal/Noise @ 1pe (SER) versus Dark current\nand Quantum & Collection Efficiencies Optimum ?\nWater tightness\nBase potting and HV cables\nElectronics tight box (16 inputs, digital outputs)Photomultipliers @ 10 bars \nGlass shape optimizationWater pressure test facility\nMechanics of the Demonstrator\nA tank; 16 photomultipliers ; Integrated electronics Definition ?\n Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay BNL 02/25/2008R&D program PMm2\n500k€/3yrs\nfunded by new French Agency (ANR)\nStarted officially 25 Jan. 07k€\n115 \n119 167 53 50 \nEngineer (LAL) \nhttp://pmm2.in2p3.fr Joël Pouthas IPN Orsay BNL 02/25/2008R&D program PMm2\n•L A L\n– P. Barillion, S. Blin, F. Dulucq, J.E Campagne , Ch. de La Taille, \nG. Martin-Chassard, L. Raux\n–S. Conforti (since Sept. 07 for 2 years)\n•I P N O\n– B. Genolini, Th. Nguyen Trung, C. Perinet, J. Peyré, J. Pouthas , \nE. Rindel, Ph. Rosier\n•L A P P\n– N. Dumont-Dayot, D. Duchesneau, J. Favier, R. Hermel , \nJ. Tassan-Viol\n•P h o t\n–B . C o m b e t t e s , F. FouchéCoordinator\nGroup leaderStudent\n Joël Pouthas IPN OrsayConcluding remarks\nThe best is generally not the cheapest … But …\nDo we always need the best ?Most of the photodetectors follows\na standard design \nSome R&D are (or will be) performed on\nHPD (Hybrid Photon Detector) \nThe design must include electronics\nMicro-electronics (Asic)\nCollaboration with industry is mandatory\nMass production and cost are key parameters\nBNL 02/25/2008 " }

[ -0.012381389737129211, -0.03176102787256241, 0.052493538707494736, -0.002093798480927944, 0.013223581947386265, 0.061688877642154694, 0.08051382005214691, -0.04807595536112785, -0.01715616136789322, 0.054019760340452194, 0.057655517011880875, -0.07435762882232666, -0.05064960941672325, 0.08034270256757736, 0.08726605772972107, 0.01731356419622898, 0.04064289852976799, 0.007127887103706598, -0.001816120813600719, -0.043072670698165894, -0.044575922191143036, -0.09189767390489578, -0.03415937349200249, 0.015240559354424477, -0.039546143263578415, 0.10395301878452301, -0.03759799152612686, 0.004380177706480026, 0.003883971134200692, -0.051193270832300186, 0.016486654058098793, 0.03897177055478096, 0.04993921518325806, -0.047197580337524414, 0.07717970013618469, 0.09052648395299911, -0.008475217968225479, -0.09865278005599976, 0.00725975725799799, 0.06512115150690079, -0.035367291420698166, 0.049266234040260315, 0.02859031967818737, -0.03355644270777702, -0.07698129862546921, 0.01617884635925293, 0.03159308806061745, -0.11403670907020569, 0.048717036843299866, 0.04426709935069084, 0.05807163193821907, 0.017593953758478165, 0.014074769802391529, -0.013809123076498508, -0.03647322952747345, 0.0865626186132431, -0.013185570016503334, -0.02278243750333786, -0.043639712035655975, -0.08023132383823395, -0.05067175254225731, -0.03417237475514412, 0.0007000763434916735, -0.07108355313539505, -0.09511338919401169, -0.07030422985553741, -0.08494257181882858, 0.009554446674883366, 0.09948600083589554, -0.10223893076181412, -0.02841774746775627, 0.0018954671686515212, -0.008013740181922913, 0.048031967133283615, 0.023828258737921715, 0.07210107892751694, 0.0989898145198822, 0.020611511543393135, 0.17355681955814362, -0.07088076323270798, -0.00915353000164032, 0.06619800627231598, -0.014819130301475525, -0.01823875866830349, -0.03804536908864975, 0.03374304622411728, -0.006056817714124918, 0.023710263893008232, 0.04929463937878609, 0.07868339121341705, 0.009362129494547844, 0.05617181211709976, -0.0736478641629219, -0.01650487445294857, -0.03035368211567402, 0.050056107342243195, -0.047118399292230606, -0.030511200428009033, -0.028462868183851242, 0.0014200130244717002, 0.04549315571784973, 0.12295879423618317, 0.09618782252073288, -0.002871297299861908, -0.019527282565832138, -0.08717095851898193, -0.006585569586604834, 0.014510602690279484, 0.027381455525755882, 0.00755567429587245, 0.020626211538910866, -0.03970961272716522, 0.07586748898029327, -0.012310965918004513, -0.018158255144953728, 0.05652660131454468, 0.001510661793872714, -0.014894754625856876, 0.005207852926105261, -0.0003590764827094972, 0.042682863771915436, -0.05132429301738739, 0.08699886500835419, 0.08140561729669571, -0.012320340611040592, 0.00015034984971862286, -0.017348967492580414, 6.813348928358294e-33, -0.02848716638982296, -0.018987467512488365, -0.043901778757572174, 0.07137749344110489, 0.06592358648777008, 0.004412523936480284, 0.036506783217191696, -0.02447575330734253, 0.03832688555121422, -0.05755758285522461, -0.05612805485725403, -0.04817081615328789, -0.0030506604816764593, -0.030609508976340294, -0.0037012018729001284, -0.0011230283416807652, -0.07645571231842041, -0.0431845523416996, -0.09248523414134979, 0.043539807200431824, 0.02022915706038475, -0.006877307314425707, -0.028523439541459084, -0.03550290688872337, 0.09411956369876862, -0.031859759241342545, -0.06982695311307907, 0.052667323499917984, 0.09840746968984604, 0.0037440035957843065, 0.015692267566919327, 0.0019995449110865593, -0.0013273234944790602, -0.04208255931735039, 0.043554943054914474, 0.0011441870592534542, 0.07275227457284927, 0.045653365552425385, 0.020076077431440353, -0.022590311244130135, -0.03715625777840614, 0.02383445017039776, 0.001966778188943863, 0.05021589249372482, 0.035093437880277634, -0.02980647422373295, 0.12805792689323425, -0.006029048003256321, 0.029475372284650803, -0.06136094033718109, -0.03281287103891373, -0.0007573434268124402, 0.0006488104118034244, -0.06556503474712372, -0.0015560495667159557, 0.04449944198131561, 0.005705681629478931, 0.04465680941939354, -0.0340355709195137, -0.02954833209514618, 0.05933113396167755, 0.048694904893636703, -0.03470694646239281, 0.005054153501987457, -0.03302040696144104, -0.040566738694906235, 0.03930662199854851, -0.006331174168735743, 0.10461404174566269, -0.02222210355103016, 0.025947116315364838, -0.048776157200336456, 0.03396408632397652, -0.10215164721012115, -0.032037604600191116, -0.09492731839418411, 0.06372509896755219, 0.02300211414694786, -0.026659946888685226, 0.04685688018798828, -0.03974398598074913, -0.021695351228117943, 0.0053660995326936245, 0.017785824835300446, -0.0400664396584034, -0.08394187688827515, 0.055166397243738174, -0.04424052685499191, -0.009079831652343273, -0.0200429018586874, 0.006888799834996462, -0.011464097537100315, 0.0449487678706646, 0.047855935990810394, -0.019586041569709778, -6.225704608702848e-33, 0.0266219824552536, -0.018095767125487328, 0.02006586454808712, -0.08303089439868927, 0.024021653458476067, -0.0149527657777071, -0.004361428320407867, -0.0547821931540966, -0.018278401345014572, -0.04306416213512421, -0.09635554254055023, 0.021532688289880753, -0.06354229897260666, -0.01707773096859455, 0.00022521993378177285, -0.0025690426118671894, -0.023580797016620636, 0.1365688592195511, -0.021405449137091637, 0.03500604256987572, 0.05208860710263252, 0.1194901391863823, -0.060497645288705826, -0.024273071438074112, 0.06618065387010574, -0.029696302488446236, 0.018607044592499733, 0.034034859389066696, 0.04914513975381851, 0.00010105107503477484, 0.02274913713335991, -0.04785509407520294, 0.07623591274023056, 0.010020940564572811, -0.004553953185677528, -0.11873592436313629, 0.007318437099456787, 0.03465864807367325, -0.11284696310758591, -0.012528572231531143, 0.15886208415031433, -0.04909272491931915, -0.04013003036379814, 0.08985590189695358, -0.0393252819776535, 0.04855303093791008, -0.06103818118572235, -0.0029708181973546743, -0.08736605197191238, 0.10264275968074799, -0.053363192826509476, -0.16313031315803528, -0.10120885819196701, -0.011125609278678894, 0.011016355827450752, 0.03139475733041763, 0.03758036717772484, 0.06432712078094482, -0.030398085713386536, 0.010562066920101643, 0.00348119018599391, -0.032732199877500534, -0.039798617362976074, 0.009252515621483326, 0.007576919160783291, 0.020891690626740456, -0.07951340079307556, 0.026256710290908813, -0.04247794672846794, 0.001957269385457039, -0.08938079327344894, -0.008888334035873413, 0.005050640553236008, -0.07914575934410095, -0.062650665640831, -0.007078655995428562, 0.001825488987378776, -0.0063876621425151825, 0.049928467720746994, -0.06186950206756592, -0.08550716936588287, -0.00035293051041662693, -0.05458562448620796, -0.0031581709627062082, -0.02704395353794098, 0.05898129567503929, 0.018556196242570877, 0.026884716004133224, -0.08828175067901611, 0.0803682878613472, -0.023844897747039795, -0.07894214987754822, 0.01109333522617817, 0.06631500273942947, -0.04588588327169418, -5.1620641983163296e-8, 0.010635138489305973, 0.012750520370900631, -0.05718635022640228, 0.0556185208261013, 0.03900369256734848, -0.032102324068546295, 0.011967986822128296, -0.05280275270342827, 0.005912737920880318, 0.12466345727443695, -0.005510585382580757, -0.013633828610181808, -0.000784742645919323, -0.015319081023335457, 0.044851891696453094, 0.024012740701436996, 0.006116827484220266, 0.045795317739248276, -0.05240623280405998, -0.01023480948060751, -0.03176712244749069, 0.03764834627509117, -0.006335399113595486, 0.11503693461418152, -0.04147971048951149, 0.005012675654143095, -0.00010748175554908812, 0.06693676114082336, -0.012027939781546593, -0.0734344869852066, 0.028391683474183083, -0.007902145385742188, 0.05218316242098808, 0.046016011387109756, 0.019739164039492607, -0.02707686647772789, -0.08363756537437439, -0.021918615326285362, -0.02136700414121151, 0.06196234002709389, -0.0145200090482831, -0.01913698948919773, 0.027892520651221275, -0.007454227190464735, -0.022013140842318535, 0.031282734125852585, -0.04094640538096428, -0.051066502928733826, 0.04598831757903099, 0.06783708930015564, -0.06826437264680862, -0.023342808708548546, -0.04808616638183594, -0.05496246740221977, 0.0361030213534832, 0.06983286887407303, -0.0067237429320812225, 0.04822860658168793, 0.0457189604640007, 0.005951933097094297, 0.022204553708434105, 0.009953442960977554, -0.05742785334587097, -0.04364735633134842 ]

{ "pdf_file": "PPFVISZB3VX72X34A67YWBPDCA3BBVCF.pdf", "text": "City of Eureka Recreation Division City of Eureka Recreation Division City of Eureka Recreation Division City of Eureka Recreation Division \nThe John Ryan Youth Center The John Ryan Youth Center The John Ryan Youth Center The John Ryan Youth Center \n1653 J ST.1653 J ST.1653 J ST.1653 J ST. \nEureka CA 95501 Eureka CA 95501 Eureka CA 95501 Eureka CA 95501 \n \n“Experience the Fun!” \nCity of Eureka \nSUMMER CAMPS \nJune 22—August 14, 2009 \n \n“Our son comes home confid ent and happy. \nThe staff are educated, positive, and energetic \n and it shows that they l ove their job. The kids s tay busy, \nentertained and well-supervised. We are thankful f or \nthis nurturing experience.” -Parent \nCamp Ryan & Camp Carson are educational, enrichment , and recreation pro- \ngrams designed to provide an enjoyable, safe and nu rturing environment for chil- \ndren ages 5-12. Each day is packed with an array o f activities to meet the indi- \nvidual needs of all participants. Summertime activ ities include: \n \nJunior Leader Program \nAll Camp Events \nSpecial Guest Speakers \nEducational Field Trips \nEnrichment Clubs \nLeader-in-Training Program \nCultural Events & Celebrations \nAnnual Summer Camp Talent Show \nCreative Art Projects \nNon-Competitive Group Games \nFree Time to Read or Play with Friends \nHealthy Afternoon Lunch prepared by the \nFood Bank for Humboldt County \n \nOUR VISION OUR VISION OUR VISION OUR VISION \nThe Eureka Recreation Division strives to develop t he whole child by providing \nopportunities for youth to learn and grow physicall y, emotionally and socially \nwhile respecting and encouraging each other’s stren gths and individuality. \nABOUT OUR PROGRAMS ABOUT OUR PROGRAMS ABOUT OUR PROGRAMS ABOUT OUR PROGRAMS Summer Camp Programs \n~Summer time fun at the pool!~ ~Summer time fun at the pool!~ ~Summer time fun at the pool!~ ~Summer time fun at the pool!~ Camp Carson is a Summer Recreation Playground Progr am run at Carson Park. \nThis program is FREE for any child between the ages of 5-12 and is a DROP-IN \nPROGRAM. Children are signed in and out daily and are not p ermitted to leave \nwithout prior parental consent. Please do not drop your children off before 10:00 \na.m. as they will not be supervised. Camp Carson c an accommodate 50 children per \nday. Please do not drop your child off and drive a way without first checking that \nthere is space available. \n \nPROGRAM HOURS PROGRAM HOURS PROGRAM HOURS PROGRAM HOURS \nMonday—Friday from 10:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. \n \nLOCATION LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION \nCARSON PARK is located at Buhne & I Streets. \n \nREGISTRATION REGISTRATION REGISTRATION REGISTRATION \nNo registration is required, but all children must have on file an Agreement, Waiver \n& Release of Liability Form signed by their parent/guardian. These forms may b e \npicked up at Carson Park on the first day of attend ance or at the Adorni Recreation \nCenter. \n \nWEATHER WEATHER WEATHER WEATHER \nWe hold camp rain or shine! In the event of a rain y day, Camp Carson can accom- \nmodate 25 children per day. Please outfit your kid (s) with proper clothing, close-\ntoed shoes (no sandals), sun protection, a water bo ttle and a jacket each day. Please \nput your child’s first and last name on all persona l items they bring to camp. \n \nFOR MORE INFORMATION FOR MORE INFORMATION FOR MORE INFORMATION FOR MORE INFORMATION \nIf you have any questions please contact Donna Wood , Recreation Supervisor @ \n268-1858. \n \n \n Summer Camp Programs \nCAMP CARSON CAMP CARSON CAMP CARSON CAMP CARSON— — ——Free Drop Free Drop Free Drop Free Drop----In Program In Program In Program In Program \n~Shootin’ Hoops!~ ~Shootin’ Hoops!~ ~Shootin’ Hoops!~ ~Shootin’ Hoops!~ LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION \nCAMP RYAN is located at The John Ryan Youth Center at 1653 J St. Eureka . \n \nREGISTRATION INFORMATION REGISTRATION INFORMATION REGISTRATION INFORMATION REGISTRATION INFORMATION \nAll children must be pre-registered prior to attend ing Camp Ryan. All sessions are one \nweek long and can accommodate 40 children per week. After the maximum is reached, \nchildren will be put on a waiting list and notified immediately of an opening. \n \nREGISTRATION FEES REGISTRATION FEES REGISTRATION FEES REGISTRATION FEES \n• Half day rates—$85 per week with a choice of mornin g 7:30 am-12:30 pm or after- \nnoons 12:30-5:30pm. \n• Full day rates—$105 per week—7:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m. \n• Register for (4) weeks and receive 10% off \n• Register for all (8) weeks and receive (1) week fre e \n• No Camp will be offered on July 3rd. Fees for that week are $68/half-day & $84/\nfull-day. \n• Non-attendance/non-participation in the program doe s not entitle a participant to a \nrefund. A refund will only be given in the event t hat there is a child on the waiting \nlist, willing to take their place. \n \nWHEN DO I REGISTER? WHEN DO I REGISTER? WHEN DO I REGISTER? WHEN DO I REGISTER? \nRegistration begins MONDAY, June 1st, 2009 and is on a first-come, first-serve basis. \nWe encourage you to register as early as possible, as enrollment is limited for this popu- \nlar program. \n \nWHERE DO I REGISTER? WHERE DO I REGISTER? WHERE DO I REGISTER? WHERE DO I REGISTER? \nRegistration takes place at the Adorni Recreation C enter, 1011 Waterfront Drive. The \nAdorni Center hours are Monday-Friday between the h ours of 8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. \nThere is NO on-site registration at Camp Ryan. Whe n registering, please note that the \nfollowing information will need to be provided: eme rgency contacts, name and phone \nnumber of child’s physician, any other parties allo wed to pick up the child including \ntheir name and phone number, and any other addition al information including medica- \ntion and/or allergies. \n \nNEED FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE? NEED FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE? NEED FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE? NEED FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE? \nWe recognize that some families are not able to ful ly finance their child’s program fees. \nThe City of Eureka works in partnership with the co mmunity in order to obtain funding \nto offset program fees for qualifying families. Sc holarships may be available to those \nwho qualify based on income requirements and offer a 50% fee reduction. Summer Camp Programs \nCAMP RYAN CAMP RYAN CAMP RYAN CAMP RYAN \n \nWEEKLY THEMES at Camp Ryan & Camp Carson WEEKLY THEMES at Camp Ryan & Camp Carson WEEKLY THEMES at Camp Ryan & Camp Carson WEEKLY THEMES at Camp Ryan & Camp Carson \nIn the spirit of fun and inspiration, each week’s a ctivities and events are centered \naround different topics and themes in order to prov ide youth a well-balanced vari- \nety of experiences. \n \nWeek 1 Week 1 Week 1 Week 1 (June 22 (June 22 (June 22 (June 22—— ——June 26) June 26) June 26) June 26) - Friends Around the World Friends Around the World Friends Around the World Friends Around the World \nYouth will learn about countries from around the wo rld while engaging in activi- \nties that build community and teamwork. \n \nWeek 2 Week 2 Week 2 Week 2 (June 29 (June 29 (June 29 (June 29—— ——July 2) July 2) July 2) July 2) - Love Our Planet Love Our Planet Love Our Planet Love Our Planet \nYouth will learn to reuse materials and enjoy activ ities that encourage respect for \nthe environment in addition to learning easy ways t o be proactive in taking care of \nour planet. \n \nWeek 3 Week 3 Week 3 Week 3 (July 6 (July 6 (July 6 (July 6 —— ——July 10) July 10) July 10) July 10) - Journey through Air, Space & Beyond Journey through Air, Space & Beyond Journey through Air, Space & Beyond Journey through Air, Space & Beyond \nImaginations will blast off with out of this world air & space science experiments \nand projects! Youth will discover what lies past our planet while exploring sci- \nence, aviation and space. \n \nWeek 4 Week 4 Week 4 Week 4 (Ju1y 13 (Ju1y 13 (Ju1y 13 (Ju1y 13 —— ——July 17) July 17) July 17) July 17) ---- Under the Forest Canopy Under the Forest Canopy Under the Forest Canopy Under the Forest Canopy \nYouth will discover the environment in which they l ive with a focus on local for- \nest ecosystems. Activities will include eco-hikes and wildlife habitat exploration. \n \nWeek 5 Week 5 Week 5 Week 5 (July 20 (July 20 (July 20 (July 20—— ——July 24) July 24) July 24) July 24) - Wild about Fins, Furs & Feathers Wild about Fins, Furs & Feathers Wild about Fins, Furs & Feathers Wild about Fins, Furs & Feathers \nYouth will learn about our planets magnificent anim als and unearth the diversity \nof their habitats with an emphasis on the animals f ound in our own backyard. \n \nWeek 6 Week 6 Week 6 Week 6 (July 27 (July 27 (July 27 (July 27—— ——July 31) July 31) July 31) July 31) - Mission Fitness, Fun & Nutrition Mission Fitness, Fun & Nutrition Mission Fitness, Fun & Nutrition Mission Fitness, Fun & Nutrition \nActivities will promote physical fitness from head to toe through focus on healthy \nplay, exercise and nutritional eating habits. Be s ure to get a good night’s sleep \nand eat your wheaties so you can play like a champi on. \n \nWeek 7 Week 7 Week 7 Week 7 (August 3 (August 3 (August 3 (August 3—— ——August 7) August 7) August 7) August 7) - Kids’ Got Talent! Kids’ Got Talent! Kids’ Got Talent! Kids’ Got Talent! \nYouth will experience performing arts such as set d esign, improv, music, and \ndance just to name a few. We will be rolling out th e red carpet for The Annual \nSummer Camp Talent Show. Be sure to get your ticket s early! \n \nWeek 8 Week 8 Week 8 Week 8 (August 10 (August 10 (August 10 (August 10— — ——August 14) August 14) August 14) August 14) - Splish Splash Party Bash! Splish Splash Party Bash! Splish Splash Party Bash! Splish Splash Party Bash! \nGet ready to enjoy a wet & wild week of water games and super soakin’ fun. Pre- \npare yourself for an end of the summer celebration you will never forget! \n Summer Camp Programs \nEDUCATION, ENRICHMENT & RECREATION EDUCATION, ENRICHMENT & RECREATION EDUCATION, ENRICHMENT & RECREATION EDUCATION, ENRICHMENT & RECREATION PARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION PARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION PARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION PARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION \nPARTICIPANT CHECK IN & CHECK OUT PARTICIPANT CHECK IN & CHECK OUT PARTICIPANT CHECK IN & CHECK OUT PARTICIPANT CHECK IN & CHECK OUT \nParents, guardians and authorized individuals liste d on the Waiver Form are re- \nquired to sign their children in and out when they drop-off and pick-up a child. \nArrangements must be made ahead of time for someone other than the designated \nparent/guardian to sign their child in and out. A child will not be released to a 3rd \nparty under any circumstances without the parent’s written or verbal approval. \nA PICTURE ID IS REQUIRED FROM EVERYONE PICKING UP YOU R CHILD. \n \nLUNCH/SNACK LUNCH/SNACK LUNCH/SNACK LUNCH/SNACK \nThe Food Bank for Humboldt County provides free lun ch for all camp participants \nat no extra cost. Campers may bring their own lunc h, however please do not send \nglass or other breakable containers, and be sure to mark all lunch/snack bags with \nyour child’s first and last name. Lunch begins at 12:00 p.m. each day depending \non the scheduled activities. We also encourage you to send 1-2 snacks with each \nCamper. \nMEDICATION MEDICATION MEDICATION MEDICATION \nStaff cannot administer or remind children to take their medication. If your child \nrequires medication please place medication in its original container, in a zip lock \nbag, with your child’s name. Include explicit inst ructions (for your child) on how \nand at what time the medication is to be taken. Pl ease talk with your child ahead of \ntime regarding these instructions. Staff cannot ap ply sunscreen, bug spray or any \nother similar topical treatment to children. Paren ts are encouraged to call Camp at \nany time to connect with their children about these topics. \n \nLATE POLICY LATE POLICY LATE POLICY LATE POLICY \nYou jeopardize your child’s privilege to attend the program by failing to pick him/\nher up at the designated closing time. If you are late, a late pick-up fee will be re- \nquired prior to your child returning to camp. \n \nHOW TO REACH STAFF OR YOUR CHILD DURING PROGRAM HOW TO REACH STAFF OR YOUR CHILD DURING PROGRAM HOW TO REACH STAFF OR YOUR CHILD DURING PROGRAM HOW TO REACH STAFF OR YOUR CHILD DURING PROGRAM \nThe Camp Ryan phone number is 441-4224. The Camp C arson phone number is \n441-4269. If our staff does not answer the phone, it may mean they are out in the \nfield, please call back. You can also call the Camp Director at 268-1844 or the Rec- \nreation Supervisor at 268-1858. \n \nSUMMER CAMP STAFF SUMMER CAMP STAFF SUMMER CAMP STAFF SUMMER CAMP STAFF \nOur Recreation Leaders are people who love kids. T hey want to spend their time \nplaying, teaching, and working with children. All staff are First Aid & CPR Certi- \nfied, Fingerprinted, TB Tested and receive extensiv e training. The Summer Camp \nstaff consistently show their enthusiasm, dedicatio n, creativity and talent in work- \ning with youth. You can be sure that we are hiring the “best of the best” to provide \nenriching, positive experiences for your children. Summer Camp Programs \nPARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION PARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION PARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION PARENT/GUARDIAN INFORMATION \n \nPOSITIVE BEHAVIOR GUIDANCE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR GUIDANCE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR GUIDANCE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR GUIDANCE \nThe City of Eureka’s Summer Camp Programs provide y outh with the opportu- \nnity to gain valuable life skills in decision makin g, peer relations, cooperation, \nand building self-confidence. Staff utilize and en courage the practice of positive \nrecognition as an effective method of behavior guid ance and are constantly on \nthe lookout for what kids are doing right! \n \nAt Summer Camp youth... • Engage in diverse and meaningful activities that de velop values, skills, and \nrelationships. \n• Have equal rights to be accepted, respected and val ued by others. \n• Are involved in decision making and program design. When youth have a \nvoice they are far more likely to enjoy themselves and behave cooperatively. \n• Enjoy a variety of fun incentive programs that are used to encourage safe, \nrespectful, and responsible behavior. \n \nBehavior that does not contribute to the well-being of others will be dealt with in \na fair and respectful manner. Natural consequences will be applied to encourage \nlearning. Parents/Guardians will be notified of al l inappropriate behaviors and \nmay be requested to pick up their child immediately . Program fees for days lost \nwill not be reimbursed. Summer Camp Staff reserve the right to remove any \nchild permanently from the program should it be nec essary to do so. \n \nBUILDING POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAMILIES BUILDING POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAMILIES BUILDING POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAMILIES BUILDING POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAMILIES \nIf you have any concerns or suggestions that will h elp us serve your children \nbetter, please let our staff know. For example: \n• Help us learn about your child’s special talents an d strengths. \n• Tell us when your child needs extra help or support . \n• Ask us questions if you don’t understand our polici es and procedures. \n• Keep us informed about any important changes so we can serve you better. \n• VISIT WHENEVER YOU CAN. YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME! \n \n \n \nSummer Camp Programs \n~Leaders at Play!~ ~Leaders at Play!~ ~Leaders at Play!~ ~Leaders at Play!~ " }

[ -0.07575724273920059, -0.033129822462797165, 0.06207026168704033, 0.023217562586069107, -0.003054095432162285, 0.07413708418607712, 0.06429284811019897, -0.05062079057097435, -0.04905008152127266, 0.08421269059181213, -0.01582776941359043, 0.051827967166900635, 0.004872673191130161, -0.0029581894632428885, 0.052071571350097656, 0.039773136377334595, 0.045806705951690674, -0.04549892246723175, -0.007088818121701479, 0.060362428426742554, 0.029254760593175888, 0.005046811420470476, 0.08999168127775192, 0.008023693226277828, 0.027591364458203316, -0.028637928888201714, -0.06392813473939896, 0.00355022051371634, -0.0877532809972763, 0.03731454163789749, 0.02086467109620571, -0.0021644018124789, 0.047908615320920944, -0.011312184855341911, 0.0014160533901304007, 0.03463727608323097, 0.10249088704586029, 0.02426285482943058, -0.033326320350170135, 0.10404100269079208, -0.09521721303462982, -0.0634797140955925, 0.019150355830788612, 0.0600101500749588, -0.14418545365333557, 0.038459621369838715, 0.05146602913737297, -0.041550662368535995, -0.03320785239338875, 0.02142414264380932, 0.01456486340612173, 0.06349702924489975, 0.03720136359333992, -0.03477717190980911, 0.032829105854034424, -0.011362814344465733, 0.04051005467772484, -0.026964889839291573, -0.020870447158813477, 0.027322497218847275, -0.08014839142560959, -0.023575350642204285, -0.021640649065375328, -0.018189437687397003, 0.03761472553014755, -0.050234634429216385, 0.03491206467151642, -0.012775448150932789, 0.010334203019738197, -0.011560913175344467, -0.03615042194724083, 0.13706664741039276, 0.018135899677872658, -0.02741854637861252, -0.003890651511028409, -0.002763784723356366, 0.10137449949979782, 0.06284549087285995, 0.1342221349477768, -0.11014728993177414, -0.005170845426619053, 0.05038825049996376, 0.022322481498122215, -0.029335347935557365, 0.0425557941198349, -0.0009372741333208978, 0.018517348915338516, -0.0030610356479883194, -0.01783190853893757, 0.0615880973637104, 0.028536291792988777, -0.03836612403392792, -0.023230111226439476, -0.018337545916438103, -0.059900954365730286, 0.0616927333176136, -0.029978035017848015, -0.06133679673075676, -0.08676103502511978, 0.01849955879151821, 0.01078725140541792, -0.029742848128080368, 0.06054522469639778, -0.06639665365219116, 0.0016788117354735732, 0.01902657188475132, 0.026921981945633888, 0.060639817267656326, -0.05407402291893959, 0.04609587416052818, 0.06347568333148956, 0.0527336411178112, -0.06367570906877518, 0.022409260272979736, -0.10186798870563507, 0.08268105238676071, 0.010707172565162182, -0.0724659338593483, 0.07235909253358841, -0.008982481434941292, 0.05993303656578064, -0.06783321499824524, -0.04262855276465416, 0.030102578923106194, 0.03960404172539711, -0.02581961452960968, -0.07020143419504166, 2.0281687951387447e-34, -0.006803040858358145, 0.0030437835957854986, -0.006635118275880814, -0.038772113621234894, -0.10057364404201508, -0.03497699648141861, 0.05384020879864693, -0.043817467987537384, -0.03294392675161362, 0.013351986184716225, -0.0674874484539032, 0.07524131238460541, 0.08268393576145172, 0.07919925451278687, -0.08036554604768753, -0.06682050228118896, -0.08684434741735458, 0.0929713100194931, -0.0007853840361349285, 0.03973357379436493, 0.057169072329998016, 0.040702953934669495, 0.004460383206605911, -0.022722605615854263, 0.0786253958940506, -0.0776142105460167, -0.009934868663549423, 0.04998541250824928, -0.06538964807987213, 0.0024184095673263073, 0.0060664755292236805, -0.00462619261816144, 0.04296227917075157, -0.06117694079875946, 0.05327710509300232, -0.07613491266965866, 0.012958519160747528, 0.010384825058281422, -0.051869094371795654, -0.03738610818982124, 0.04896486923098564, -0.010016379877924919, 0.00569148687645793, 0.006019982509315014, 0.006026100367307663, -0.0061714318580925465, -0.02683379501104355, -0.0599784180521965, -0.11125592887401581, -0.039722833782434464, -0.02130243554711342, 0.04976325482130051, 0.005801185499876738, -0.002456140471622348, 0.0005067029851488769, -0.08046307414770126, 0.013350240886211395, -0.041800498962402344, 0.02091556042432785, -0.09506335109472275, -0.03126068040728569, -0.062338896095752716, 0.02794617973268032, -0.004086441360414028, -0.0628490224480629, -0.06248649209737778, -0.00871462281793356, 0.03944797068834305, 0.008919616229832172, 0.09471655637025833, 0.05878214165568352, 0.005791872274130583, -0.0032140035182237625, 0.01321704313158989, -0.08178599178791046, 0.06366962194442749, 0.018748346716165543, 0.008170773275196552, 0.043643176555633545, 0.015989113599061966, 0.02277366816997528, -0.05786200985312462, 0.04894695430994034, 0.019994953647255898, 0.05552137270569801, 0.08148352801799774, 0.020766332745552063, -0.048057910054922104, -0.024242708459496498, -0.10303101688623428, 0.021853765472769737, -0.09349347651004791, 0.0829920843243599, -0.026876350864768028, 0.05354316160082817, -3.336133048186302e-33, -0.006262199953198433, 0.13213127851486206, 0.013774597086012363, -0.06299056857824326, 0.00014693789125885814, -0.009328464046120644, 0.055976781994104385, -0.05280395597219467, -0.03608206659555435, 0.009829286485910416, -0.05303257703781128, 0.029733698815107346, -0.08063358813524246, -0.019578322768211365, 0.024177424609661102, -0.0838385596871376, -0.025498630478978157, -0.05744655057787895, 0.04744083806872368, -0.028544912114739418, -0.015244209207594395, 0.07663977146148682, 0.08546893298625946, 0.0975024625658989, 0.03005354292690754, -0.037084806710481644, 0.003848517779260874, 0.053568486124277115, -0.0011526126181706786, 0.03425407037138939, -0.023974111303687096, -0.04816998541355133, -0.0603824108839035, 0.04967542737722397, 0.05263401195406914, -0.04801036790013313, -0.03768188878893852, -0.044662654399871826, -0.03931606560945511, 0.06412097811698914, 0.0809306651353836, -0.03141054883599281, -0.01117576751857996, 0.03542614355683327, -0.054952189326286316, -0.020406648516654968, 0.01998543180525303, -0.034183159470558167, -0.06460370868444443, -0.040694642812013626, -0.03893900290131569, -0.08314698189496994, 0.015827786177396774, -0.031397148966789246, -0.01791078969836235, 0.035612255334854126, 0.022080546244978905, -0.064374178647995, 0.00908112246543169, 0.05970210209488869, -0.04822564125061035, 0.05738823115825653, -0.04767371341586113, -0.015634648501873016, -0.009209895506501198, -0.05902258679270744, -0.01810486800968647, -0.025103546679019928, -0.02849109098315239, 0.05729043111205101, 0.007426588796079159, -0.1361449807882309, 0.018740953877568245, 0.014207027852535248, -0.001259762211702764, 0.017524398863315582, 0.05705958604812622, 0.0005392635939642787, -0.07707325369119644, 0.0909990519285202, 0.05055606737732887, -0.0993623435497284, -0.021750422194600105, -0.05794438347220421, -0.036115579307079315, -0.01156563125550747, -0.013255437836050987, 0.01975715532898903, -0.037441790103912354, 0.05847473815083504, -0.11424469202756882, -0.05754956603050232, -0.0332958959043026, 0.009826328605413437, -0.024685829877853394, -4.9931337287034694e-8, 0.10926446318626404, 0.03453170508146286, -0.060859564691782, -0.0062110344879329205, -0.02869012951850891, -0.10792353004217148, -0.0024870880879461765, -0.03819018229842186, -0.011058078147470951, 0.0402325876057148, 0.05737414211034775, 0.0853448435664177, 0.06497712433338165, -0.028752632439136505, 0.0080005107447505, -0.013833902776241302, -0.05800000578165054, -0.009220416657626629, -0.09282482415437698, -0.08796931803226471, 0.03248355910181999, -0.01914084143936634, -0.06835470348596573, 0.08656582981348038, -0.030031738802790642, 0.13237889111042023, 0.01998511143028736, 0.045292485505342484, 0.01488078199326992, 0.039697445929050446, 0.001371176796965301, 0.040376096963882446, -0.033027421683073044, 0.023132221773266792, 0.09695103019475937, 0.0520017147064209, 0.012908532284200191, -0.017996860668063164, -0.004506860394030809, -0.005984087008982897, -0.005822708830237389, 0.011267350055277348, 0.04049302637577057, 0.02176973782479763, 0.009160053916275501, 0.042193129658699036, -0.11590085178613663, 0.002494832267984748, -0.005407629068940878, -0.0399494394659996, 0.059636879712343216, 0.052288301289081573, -0.03002052567899227, 0.04827316105365753, -0.06961411982774734, 0.012387881986796856, -0.0592002309858799, -0.0017397507326677442, 0.01943153329193592, -0.05565861985087395, -0.0025763227604329586, -0.06971042603254318, 0.02945728600025177, -0.027787569910287857 ]

{ "pdf_file": "R6LHWCGK5EOQHHR7EXRI7ZJLBG2R5QOF.pdf", "text": "9/24/2003 Congress Approves Military Pay Raise\n\r\nCongress Approves Military Pay Raise\r\n\r\n\r\nMoran Supports Defense Appropriations Legislation\r\n\r\n\r\nWASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Jerry Moran today announced that the U.S. House of Representatives has passed\nthe Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act, which includes new benefits for military men and women.  \r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\nThe legislation includes an average 4.1 percent pay raise for military personnel.  It also reduces the out-of-pocket housing\nexpenses for troops from 7.5 percent to 3.5 percent.  In addition, the legislation provides for significant increases in the\nDefense Health Program. \r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\"The men and women of our military work hard to protect our freedoms, and it's important that we recognize their\nservice,\" Moran said.  \"This raise in pay and benefits will help members of our Armed Forces to better provide for their\nfamilies.\" \r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\nThe legislation now goes to the Senate for approval.\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n###\r\n\r\nCongressman Jerry Moran\nhttp://www.jerrymoran.house.gov Powered by Joomla! Generated: 28 February, 2007, 18:19" }

[ 0.05138787627220154, -0.01681768335402012, 0.06289313733577728, 0.031152358278632164, 0.07217410951852798, 0.06613443046808243, -0.05545118823647499, -0.01890607550740242, -0.00813384260982275, -0.0474252887070179, -0.06838729232549667, -0.026162274181842804, -0.025699377059936523, 0.024102555587887764, 0.11688337475061417, 0.12452518194913864, -0.0213076900690794, 0.027270236983895302, 0.03157809376716614, 0.1124579906463623, -0.02168922685086727, 0.008733252063393593, -0.07914898544549942, -0.007214751560240984, -0.10129782557487488, 0.01789078116416931, -0.041232168674468994, 0.008328152820467949, 0.006089742295444012, 0.012714017182588577, 0.057532984763383865, 0.0064750537276268005, 0.03609689697623253, 0.04482047259807587, 0.03792564943432808, -0.021825548261404037, 0.0717877447605133, -0.03076312504708767, -0.001721421955153346, 0.1143765076994896, -0.08232569694519043, 0.015932878479361534, 0.026394585147500038, 0.0663960874080658, -0.05325508117675781, -0.012335329316556454, -0.08878802508115768, -0.049128662794828415, 0.08226627111434937, -0.04259299859404564, 0.012731336988508701, -0.04179605096578598, -0.05417182669043541, 0.05415782704949379, -0.027414623647928238, -0.027948226779699326, -0.08315165340900421, -0.08503987640142441, 0.01319289579987526, -0.04951128363609314, 0.09447871893644333, -0.05178448185324669, 0.0018395358929410577, 0.020525489002466202, -0.016328826546669006, 0.07826123386621475, -0.07757359743118286, -0.028289267793297768, 0.07082314789295197, -0.07571247965097427, 0.00563512509688735, 0.05595079064369202, -0.04609522223472595, -0.04530385136604309, -0.04350729286670685, 0.005746809765696526, 0.018342915922403336, 0.14655384421348572, 0.12789733707904816, -0.10642677545547485, -0.009851664304733276, 0.03324386849999428, -0.04794660210609436, -0.02470417506992817, 0.0006157583557069302, -0.007705684285610914, -0.030047254636883736, -0.03164771571755409, -0.01240049209445715, 0.07048409432172775, 0.01727754808962345, -0.025654615834355354, 0.02744986303150654, -0.11950176954269409, 0.01827338896691799, -0.03729517012834549, -0.011025008745491505, -0.05861005559563637, 0.01686614565551281, 0.03630160540342331, 0.03570453077554703, 0.01737777143716812, 0.00043753068894147873, -0.05499572306871414, 0.027689047157764435, -0.019800206646323204, -0.09400981664657593, 0.029372727498412132, 0.0023075116332620382, 0.050923995673656464, 0.02958058938384056, 0.03573250770568848, 0.02775687165558338, 0.07404961436986923, -0.06770610064268112, 0.04114017263054848, 0.006722549442201853, -0.06971175223588943, 0.07216665893793106, -0.03835657238960266, 0.005713719874620438, 0.006347453687340021, -0.007873179391026497, -0.08047156780958176, 0.061933573335409164, -0.01572287268936634, -0.02845555730164051, 2.816114183849692e-33, 0.012126235291361809, -0.000990410684607923, -0.0345677025616169, -0.017923427745699883, 0.01384451612830162, -0.07266785949468613, -0.016858821734786034, -0.045521337538957596, -0.09111181646585464, 0.02656814269721508, 0.031233474612236023, 0.0427924208343029, 0.059563275426626205, -0.03328583389520645, 0.02027299627661705, -0.06901782751083374, 0.010297241620719433, 0.006543051451444626, 0.033352453261613846, -0.08189478516578674, 0.028652366250753403, 0.0008726951200515032, 0.046594541519880295, -0.01830035261809826, 0.004103694576770067, 0.006544679403305054, -0.011332372203469276, -0.008884542621672153, -0.076749287545681, 0.016758400946855545, -0.05170523375272751, 0.014113661833107471, 0.0584222711622715, 0.04504930227994919, 0.12573137879371643, -0.0841463953256607, 0.06447211652994156, -0.06831498444080353, 0.039368923753499985, -0.0633653774857521, 0.01139614637941122, 0.034726325422525406, 0.061835527420043945, 0.01551179587841034, 0.07944046705961227, -0.03442882373929024, 0.04679662361741066, -0.023219315335154533, 0.043577615171670914, -0.03237328305840492, -0.019133171066641808, -0.00010725713946158066, -0.0786813423037529, -0.02910197526216507, -0.051132433116436005, -0.07132862508296967, 0.000010631478289724328, -0.05394059047102928, -0.08395572751760483, -0.03134665638208389, 0.010142380371689796, 0.05628255009651184, 0.02311556600034237, 0.00402957946062088, 0.004699015524238348, -0.04554908722639084, 0.03742895647883415, 0.08142510801553726, -0.04299187287688255, -0.019855273887515068, 0.07266540080308914, -0.025980446487665176, 0.038994718343019485, -0.08603900671005249, -0.10248499363660812, -0.01619013212621212, 0.023174425587058067, 0.07042943686246872, 0.00813289824873209, 0.004381416365504265, -0.046394187957048416, -0.002480115508660674, -0.009666619822382927, 0.11812718212604523, -0.013216919265687466, 0.029631221666932106, 0.08775649964809418, -0.0343497209250927, -0.024335462599992752, -0.07794462889432907, 0.022260596975684166, -0.018586372956633568, 0.0304831825196743, -0.09403091669082642, 0.01020878180861473, -3.947926062569469e-33, -0.03973444178700447, -0.025168582797050476, 0.05225006863474846, -0.06424625962972641, -0.04555148631334305, -0.0275995172560215, 0.019519686698913574, -0.09889911860227585, 0.020792843773961067, -0.018002625554800034, -0.1197778731584549, 0.0892452821135521, 0.009635296650230885, -0.04738011211156845, -0.037406016141176224, 0.021415460854768753, 0.016471510753035545, -0.027797766029834747, -0.06198502331972122, -0.11771988868713379, -0.009876050986349583, 0.005547831766307354, 0.02037903480231762, 0.0922526866197586, 0.008274739608168602, 0.058345597237348557, 0.059192921966314316, -0.03009899891912937, 0.08867933601140976, 0.003578237723559141, -0.01671888679265976, -0.018825333565473557, -0.05485042184591293, 0.0036762948147952557, -0.05532214790582657, -0.06408455967903137, 0.05583629384636879, -0.022787457332015038, -0.03398195281624794, -0.0294300876557827, 0.03919509798288345, -0.021515347063541412, -0.03996782377362251, -0.029919853433966637, -0.012643744237720966, 0.02802053652703762, 0.00586890522390604, -0.009004655294120312, -0.07454399764537811, -0.0003335096698720008, -0.029427846893668175, -0.01416750531643629, -0.03717241808772087, 0.01006719283759594, -0.09826238453388214, 0.011843802407383919, 0.023726021870970726, 0.0022870453540235758, -0.03943372145295143, -0.0100723160430789, 0.025867674499750137, 0.09153243154287338, -0.020280279219150543, 0.011670633219182491, 0.03191374987363815, 0.008745869621634483, -0.07946144789457321, -0.015706848353147507, -0.03126860782504082, -0.04302939400076866, -0.0010658185929059982, 0.0007964296382851899, -0.019550038501620293, 0.009736228734254837, 0.03985963761806488, 0.055225178599357605, 0.06497975438833237, -0.0339733324944973, -0.05978519096970558, 0.13698959350585938, -0.018771221861243248, -0.013631620444357395, -0.08953617513179779, 0.023979485034942627, 0.03263835608959198, -0.012079890817403793, 0.0016010227845981717, -0.05627709627151489, 0.019159559160470963, 0.06202361732721329, -0.0803472101688385, 0.05784811079502106, -0.06695376336574554, 0.06344529241323471, -0.07024342566728592, -4.7092214572330704e-8, 0.03505488112568855, 0.018551241606473923, -0.10854266583919525, -0.0031655707862228155, -0.011065124534070492, -0.0669337809085846, -0.03511721268296242, -0.021870989352464676, -0.027904506772756577, 0.07313425838947296, 0.05102492496371269, -0.02740204893052578, 0.018113259226083755, 0.018413109704852104, -0.009052703157067299, -0.06042303144931793, 0.032249968498945236, -0.04528810828924179, -0.0667881965637207, 0.014855650253593922, -0.05158359184861183, 0.01243382878601551, -0.01944867894053459, -0.018611790612339973, 0.022782566025853157, 0.029735935851931572, -0.0064963060431182384, 0.06393156200647354, 0.0468856506049633, 0.0853443592786789, 0.0005277920281514525, 0.0727795884013176, -0.11857832968235016, 0.055855028331279755, 0.052597321569919586, -0.0042611462995409966, 0.017705626785755157, 0.03320115804672241, 0.08646862208843231, 0.08074204623699188, -0.02656189166009426, 0.09519986808300018, -0.07007677853107452, 0.10856857150793076, -0.030187347903847694, 0.047862257808446884, -0.0880756676197052, 0.06202370673418045, 0.10791327804327011, -0.03836480900645256, 0.023422881960868835, -0.015462459065020084, -0.035277109593153, 0.048291195183992386, -0.0018208776600658894, 0.05068479850888252, -0.02420766092836857, -0.05844474956393242, 0.04570704698562622, 0.037990886718034744, 0.0012976177968084812, -0.05271799489855766, 0.009156960994005203, 0.05518607795238495 ]

{ "pdf_file": "YR3GWIPLRONWKH7DSOR3LVKXS2ORMWMC.pdf", "text": "STARK, MILLER, FARR INTRODUCE BILL TO ESTABLISH SAN FRANCISCO BAY\nWILDLIFE REFUGE COMPLEXThursday, 10 July 2008\nThe\r\nbill would unite the Bay Area&rsquo;s seven separate national wildlife\r\nrefuges into a single wildlife complex in order to leverage greater\r\nfederal funding for these unique habitats.\r\n\r\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, Wednesday, July 11, 2008\n\r\nContact: Brian Cook (202) 225-3202\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSTARK, MILLER, FARR INTRODUCE BILL TO ESTABLISH SAN FRANCISCO BAY WILDLIFE REFUGE COMPLEX\n\r\n\r\nJoining of Seven Wildlife Refuges Would Help Ensure Additional Federal Assistance\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nWashington,\r\nDC &ndash; Rep. Pete Stark (CA-13), Rep. George Miller (CA-7) and Rep. Sam\r\nFarr (CA-17) joined together to introduce the San Francisco Bay\r\nNational Wildlife Refuge Complex Establishment Act (H.R. 6479). The\r\nbill would unite the Bay Area&rsquo;s seven separate national wildlife\r\nrefuges into a single wildlife complex in order to leverage greater\r\nfederal funding for these unique habitats.\r\n\r\n\r\nRep. Stark:\r\n&ldquo;The Bay Area&rsquo;s wildlife refuges are an essential part of our\r\ncommunity. By uniting these refuges, we strengthen our opportunities\r\nfor greater federal support. That support is vital if we are to save\r\nrare California wildlife from extinction, fight global warming, and\r\npreserve a beautiful part of our country that can be enjoyed by future\r\ngenerations.&rdquo;\r\n\r\n\r\nRep. Miller: \"The wetlands and estuaries\r\nnow under protection are an important part of the health of the\r\nBay-Delta. This new bill will help ensure that these vital areas remain\r\na viable habitat for marine animals, fish and wildlife, and will\r\nprotect this powerful economic engine for the Bay Area. I'm proud to\r\nsupport the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Complex Establishment\r\nAct.\"\rThe Online Office of Congressman Pete Stark\nhttp://www.stark.house.gov Powered by Joomla! Generated: 25 March, 2009, 12:53 \r\n\r\nRep. Farr: &ldquo;As everyone in California knows,\r\nwater is life. This legislation will protect one of the largest\r\nwatersheds on the state&rsquo;s Central Coast, combining the refuges from San\r\nFrancisco to the Monterey Bay. The beautiful coastline and wetlands\r\nthat make up the watershed in Monterey are the lifeblood of the\r\ncommunity, creating tourism and supporting farmers and the fishing\r\nindustry. I thank Chairman Stark for his work on this vital issue.&rdquo;\r\n\r\n\r\nThe\r\nAntioch Dunes, Don Edwards San Francisco Bay, Ellicott Slough,\r\nFarallon, Marin Islands, Salinas River, and San Pablo Bay National\r\nWildlife Refuges together constitute the nation&rsquo;s largest collection of\r\nurban wildlife refuges, totaling more than 46,000 acres. Together, they\r\nare home to hundreds of wildlife species -- including over 128\r\nthreatened or endangered animals and marine mammals that depend on\r\nthese refuges to survive.\r\n\r\n\r\nIn addition to rare flora and\r\nfauna, these refuges offer other benefits. In hosting more than 1.5\r\nmillion visitors every year, they serve as powerful economic engines\r\nfor northern California.\r\n\r\n\r\nH.R. 6479 is endorsed by Save\r\nthe Bay, an environmental organization that has been fundamental in\r\nprotecting and restoring these wildlife oases in the Bay Area&rsquo;s urban\r\nenvironment.\r\n\r\nThe Online Office of Congressman Pete Stark\nhttp://www.stark.house.gov Powered by Joomla! Generated: 25 March, 2009, 12:53" }

[ -0.0004007768293377012, 0.00003761213883990422, 0.01500999741256237, 0.043400440365076065, -0.05429932475090027, 0.013195017352700233, -0.0976763591170311, 0.019936351105570793, -0.09861829876899719, 0.027500448748469353, 0.007667968515306711, -0.03703683987259865, 0.002450498752295971, 0.003405411262065172, 0.020785236731171608, 0.016888830810785294, 0.058034639805555344, 0.036455217748880386, 0.0568481907248497, -0.09605468064546585, 0.014763922430574894, -0.00231985398568213, -0.013670243322849274, -0.1102728396654129, 0.20303748548030853, -0.013198398053646088, 0.04848981648683548, 0.0625043660402298, 0.02774874120950699, -0.04445809870958328, -0.08442483097314835, -0.008201788179576397, 0.008515385910868645, 0.01949884369969368, 0.02332819439470768, -0.055370036512613297, 0.05414143204689026, 0.031111543998122215, -0.05872062221169472, 0.05273795500397682, -0.02539634518325329, -0.013724678196012974, -0.046121664345264435, -0.01411019079387188, -0.05739421024918556, -0.009387524798512459, -0.03025720827281475, 0.05007031932473183, 0.023988574743270874, 0.05860646814107895, 0.10195703059434891, 0.02192779816687107, -0.014784440398216248, 0.01102397870272398, -0.0281552504748106, 0.018224326893687248, 0.039568670094013214, -0.06787250190973282, -0.004478095564991236, 0.02211391180753708, -0.05810318514704704, 0.03799370676279068, -0.0584014467895031, 0.02897988259792328, 0.041717782616615295, -0.05544222146272659, -0.08113470673561096, 0.007296007126569748, -0.03778103366494179, -0.09722719341516495, -0.05998454615473747, -0.09547704458236694, -0.03459225594997406, -0.051251232624053955, 0.018341248854994774, -0.005789280869066715, 0.0921064242720604, 0.06273917108774185, 0.05461426451802254, -0.05335458368062973, -0.003364796983078122, -0.02630169689655304, -0.010341370478272438, -0.036525219678878784, -0.03445440158247948, -0.03807834908366203, 0.08054836094379425, 0.09641119092702866, 0.08232872188091278, -0.04818618297576904, 0.10562652349472046, 0.052431296557188034, -0.0673268660902977, -0.06897241622209549, 0.05432025343179703, 0.005227420013397932, -0.10015026479959488, -0.014473713003098965, -0.010325802490115166, 0.02021297812461853, 0.025561586022377014, -0.050593625754117966, -0.026445873081684113, -0.055762264877557755, 0.0069771879352629185, 0.005199141334742308, 0.030354658141732216, 0.06940406560897827, -0.004483636934310198, -0.03781716153025627, -0.013625671155750751, -0.0032798023894429207, -0.019106179475784302, -0.04633083939552307, -0.05314536765217781, -0.008416855707764626, 0.07070723176002502, -0.07977312803268433, 0.004998086951673031, 0.009537216275930405, 0.05316765978932381, 0.030910659581422806, -0.10472998768091202, -0.021689165383577347, -0.03971903398633003, -0.025136150419712067, -0.0222637839615345, 3.97837320296569e-33, 0.07080420851707458, 0.04895075038075447, -0.007569930516183376, -0.11449550837278366, 0.018719498068094254, -0.005408692639321089, 0.041734885424375534, 0.03400995954871178, 0.035082265734672546, 0.022048909217119217, -0.05089131370186806, 0.04506002739071846, 0.050655972212553024, 0.022574638947844505, 0.05634182691574097, -0.03762229532003403, 0.0019416345749050379, 0.03066462278366089, 0.024509452283382416, 0.08433530479669571, -0.09428317844867706, -0.04338951036334038, 0.022677218541502953, -0.02041982300579548, -0.012899322435259819, -0.013567624613642693, 0.002920887665823102, 0.021941455081105232, 0.06119808554649353, -0.01224122941493988, 0.037129681557416916, -0.03719579428434372, -0.0009243123349733651, 0.02530490793287754, -0.03381026163697243, -0.005650086794048548, 0.05007884278893471, 0.0019058330217376351, 0.021187951788306236, -0.02811320684850216, -0.04860350489616394, -0.004925284534692764, -0.0028728151228278875, 0.005283119156956673, -0.003551735542714596, 0.05194847285747528, 0.03823336586356163, 0.024027597159147263, 0.04198150709271431, -0.00027521984884515405, -0.048628032207489014, -0.008015262894332409, -0.05594008415937424, -0.01781395450234413, -0.054249610751867294, 0.025042856112122536, 0.034985512495040894, 0.007849887013435364, 0.03418629616498947, 0.05877035856246948, -0.0501454658806324, -0.03070412576198578, -0.014999473467469215, -0.011088380590081215, -0.057189036160707474, -0.0383773073554039, 0.000327855785144493, 0.0028232920449227095, 0.0778304934501648, 0.019733648747205734, 0.010729785077273846, -0.00004467813778319396, 0.06827972084283829, 0.025816094130277634, 0.025424541905522346, 0.01880677044391632, -0.006746675819158554, 0.01574169099330902, 0.04651428759098053, 0.012152297422289848, -0.024295905604958534, 0.01328843180090189, -0.01168815791606903, -0.05127555504441261, 0.10905199497938156, 0.02859392575919628, 0.016339479014277458, 0.027381809428334236, 0.011219903826713562, -0.023499151691794395, -0.033752214163541794, -0.008529937826097012, -0.012651856988668442, 0.00686278473585844, 0.08629690110683441, -4.420065205287164e-33, 0.011798394843935966, 0.09960809350013733, -0.022532789036631584, 0.036293353885412216, -0.013836553320288658, 0.017223238945007324, 0.024589860811829567, 0.018510639667510986, 0.05300517752766609, 0.06079932674765587, -0.09678289294242859, 0.014412976801395416, 0.03991192951798439, 0.0021788207814097404, 0.008822252973914146, -0.09048879146575928, -0.02929440513253212, 0.04551731422543526, 0.04463580623269081, -0.0008646954083815217, 0.0034049409441649914, 0.042155034840106964, -0.012258159928023815, -0.000017823263988248073, 0.11836352199316025, 0.020896397531032562, -0.14498446881771088, 0.01840662769973278, -0.07397337257862091, 0.0755237340927124, -0.028886158019304276, -0.04381094500422478, -0.03322802856564522, 0.019383346661925316, -0.04531404376029968, -0.021246513351798058, 0.03470727428793907, 0.07214956730604172, 0.03209085762500763, 0.017628181725740433, 0.06645599752664566, -0.11863184720277786, -0.004698903765529394, 0.010080600157380104, 0.06280485540628433, -0.012818672694265842, -0.02050621062517166, -0.08337031304836273, -0.0964399129152298, -0.0501088909804821, -0.02471361868083477, 0.016382120549678802, -0.04345162585377693, 0.07091832906007767, -0.026105159893631935, 0.027735412120819092, 0.09650831669569016, -0.03578926622867584, -0.1007508635520935, -0.055068984627723694, 0.10595004260540009, 0.05431637167930603, 0.03329184278845787, 0.08352663367986679, 0.04117261990904808, -0.01716979220509529, 0.07309025526046753, -0.12329983711242676, -0.023985087871551514, -0.010303342714905739, -0.07507523894309998, 0.03457396477460861, 0.0256038848310709, -0.04609303921461105, -0.0021507462952286005, 0.05683613196015358, 0.10864318907260895, 0.037250492721796036, -0.024089932441711426, 0.04114428162574768, -0.1026754081249237, -0.03436719998717308, 0.033913977444171906, -0.010909339413046837, -0.10936799645423889, -0.07063549011945724, 0.025712519884109497, -0.0134053910151124, 0.04748338460922241, 0.05062566697597504, -0.12352341413497925, 0.06380390375852585, -0.011969476006925106, 0.02462785877287388, 0.037071678787469864, -6.533652907592113e-8, 0.020278701558709145, -0.0040626609697937965, -0.06994573771953583, 0.024013565853238106, 0.06138140708208084, -0.04685085266828537, 0.0133077222853899, 0.08035692572593689, -0.006063991691917181, 0.07911135256290436, 0.04604453966021538, -0.008928473107516766, 0.05031784251332283, -0.07232232391834259, -0.018130291253328323, 0.038754917681217194, 0.05794641003012657, 0.04044594243168831, -0.04693381115794182, -0.04294033348560333, 0.045183226466178894, 0.09078550338745117, -0.03484953194856644, 0.037021372467279434, -0.05970320105552673, 0.04633701220154762, -0.006349749863147736, 0.12115016579627991, 0.03188090771436691, 0.044845905154943466, 0.014783400110900402, -0.011380145326256752, -0.01679735817015171, -0.04586770012974739, -0.029112758114933968, -0.08950483053922653, -0.10367713868618011, 0.03018837235867977, 0.034813519567251205, 0.04307512193918228, 0.04594438523054123, -0.0163788590580225, -0.061471689492464066, -0.02130134217441082, 0.09920310229063034, -0.040564727038145065, -0.17564459145069122, -0.05172283947467804, 0.06130310893058777, -0.03748428076505661, 0.007829456590116024, 0.0037288754247128963, -0.06445221602916718, -0.04819105193018913, 0.01632339134812355, -0.07387936860322952, -0.03924867510795593, -0.06596963852643967, -0.050767932087183, -0.018099144101142883, 0.00259905937127769, -0.08530020713806152, -0.022594893351197243, -0.03877362236380577 ]

{ "pdf_file": "E2XYIWPO7VKZRRA4USIRPBU3HCDVEKRV.pdf", "text": "INCORPORATING THE 2.70% GENERAL SCHEDULE INCREASE AND A LOCALITY PAYMENT OF 7.68%\nFOR THE LOCALITY PAY AREA OF REST OF U.S. \n (Net Increase: 3.57%)\nEffective January 2001\nHOURLY BASIC (B) Rates by Grade and Step\nHOURLY OVERTIME (O) Rates by Grade and Step\n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10\nGS-1 B $7.35 $7.59 $7.84 $8.08 $8.33 $8.47 $8.71 $8.95 $8.96 $9.19\nO 11.03 11.39 11.76 12.12 12.50 12.71 13.07 13.43 13.44 13.79\n 2B 8.26 8.46 8.73 8.96 9.07 9.33 9.60 9.87 10.13 10.40\nO 12.39 12.69 13.10 13.44 13.61 14.00 14.40 14.81 15.20 15.60\n 3B 9.02 9.32 9.62 9.92 10.22 10.52 10.82 11.12 11.42 11.72\nO 13.53 13.98 14.43 14.88 15.33 15.78 16.23 16.68 17.13 17.58\n 4B 10.12 10.46 10.80 11.13 11.47 11.81 12.15 12.48 12.82 13.16\nO 15.18 15.69 16.20 16.70 17.21 17.72 18.23 18.72 19.23 19.74\n 5B 11.32 11.70 12.08 12.46 12.83 13.21 13.59 13.97 14.34 14.72\nO 16.98 17.55 18.12 18.69 19.25 19.82 20.39 20.96 21.51 22.08\n 6B 12.62 13.04 13.46 13.88 14.30 14.72 15.14 15.57 15.99 16.41\nO 18.93 19.56 20.19 20.82 21.45 22.08 22.71 23.36 23.99 24.62\n 7B 14.03 14.49 14.96 15.43 15.90 16.36 16.83 17.30 17.77 18.23\nO 21.05 21.74 22.44 23.15 23.85 24.54 25.25 25.95 26.66 27.35\n 8B 15.53 16.05 16.57 17.09 17.61 18.12 18.64 19.16 19.68 20.20\nO 23.30 24.08 24.86 25.64 26.42 27.18 27.96 28.34 28.34 28.34\n 9B 17.16 17.73 18.30 18.87 19.44 20.02 20.59 21.16 21.73 22.30\nO 25.74 26.60 27.45 28.31 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34\n 10B 18.89 19.52 20.15 20.78 21.41 22.04 22.67 23.30 23.93 24.56\nO 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34\n 11B 20.76 21.45 22.14 22.84 23.53 24.22 24.91 25.60 26.30 26.99\nO 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34\n 12B 24.88 25.71 26.54 27.37 28.20 29.03 29.86 30.68 31.51 32.34\nO 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34\n 13B 29.59 30.57 31.56 32.55 33.53 34.52 35.51 36.49 37.48 38.47\nO 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34\n 14B 34.96 36.13 37.29 38.46 39.63 40.79 41.96 43.12 44.29 45.45\nO 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34\n 15 B 41.13 42.50 43.87 45.24 46.61 47.98 49.35 50.72 52.09 53.46\nO 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34 28.34\nNOTE: Locality rates of pay are basic pay only for certain purposes--see \"Salary Tables for 2001\" cover sheet.SALARY TABLE 2001-RUS" }

[ -0.03426818177103996, 0.020876646041870117, 0.009126229211688042, 0.04409366473555565, 0.004358213394880295, -0.006648695562034845, 0.038858503103256226, -0.013034403324127197, 0.027276571840047836, 0.030050719156861305, 0.00047018559416756034, -0.1061452254652977, -0.058089207857847214, 0.030158303678035736, 0.043369606137275696, 0.021289674565196037, 0.052879299968481064, -0.044901710003614426, 0.021531010046601295, 0.04470242187380791, 0.0972105860710144, 0.00033344695111736655, -0.012988129630684853, 0.014669019728899002, -0.013538521714508533, -0.015711216256022453, -0.12021449208259583, 0.06813652068376541, -0.02438250184059143, 0.04960465058684349, -0.04958853870630264, 0.06117752939462662, 0.016560107469558716, -0.016293765977025032, 0.12381228804588318, 0.0856999009847641, -0.006546905264258385, -0.09739126265048981, -0.028441142290830612, -0.021061250939965248, -0.07037746161222458, -0.06473839282989502, -0.014798743650317192, 0.048094186931848526, -0.09508183598518372, -0.010167005471885204, 0.026586491614580154, -0.05895012617111206, -0.01895769126713276, -0.05499075725674629, 0.0058204131200909615, -0.0034660757519304752, 0.06474490463733673, 0.05966474488377571, -0.06929190456867218, 0.017931200563907623, 0.02349187806248665, -0.02066648006439209, 0.06222816929221153, -0.014155279844999313, 0.03967425972223282, -0.09685365110635757, -0.1223343014717102, 0.015945186838507652, 0.0415533073246479, 0.046089932322502136, -0.036368679255247116, 0.005771082825958729, 0.04200202226638794, -0.09369898587465286, -0.025852585211396217, 0.041384242475032806, -0.008281692862510681, 0.006220694165676832, 0.00401280727237463, 0.02308538742363453, 0.07106274366378784, 0.06875008344650269, 0.11653898656368256, -0.13542267680168152, 0.028611646965146065, 0.05945756286382675, -0.003770256182178855, -0.0050332495011389256, 0.06084669753909111, 0.0735786035656929, 0.0458386167883873, 0.15458185970783234, -0.006925364024937153, 0.03482414409518242, -0.004397638142108917, 0.038580652326345444, -0.0032593088690191507, -0.05028488487005234, -0.010671825148165226, 0.027018345892429352, 0.001974782207980752, -0.09509575366973877, 0.0038069835864007473, 0.022149842232465744, 0.027733931317925453, 0.039242587983608246, -0.04366637021303177, -0.04456093907356262, -0.05570095404982567, -0.02652652934193611, -0.12085116654634476, 0.03953985497355461, -0.002315583871677518, 0.013459715992212296, -0.003934917971491814, 0.020302582532167435, 0.03030048869550228, 0.0709100067615509, -0.044276997447013855, 0.11515878885984421, 0.01947326399385929, 0.050944048911333084, 0.03239641338586807, -0.055411793291568756, -0.011425557546317577, -0.06309468299150467, -0.002244906034320593, -0.051089830696582794, 0.025693468749523163, -0.030993307009339333, -0.06250178068876266, 5.9074273909322204e-33, 0.0610373355448246, 0.0663483664393425, 0.04473508521914482, -0.03132036700844765, 0.07339341193437576, 0.0019460561452433467, -0.014832660555839539, 0.055548518896102905, -0.024669261649250984, -0.05640183761715889, 0.0585365928709507, 0.030969511717557907, 0.07687895745038986, 0.034500136971473694, -0.06469964236021042, -0.03829992562532425, -0.009400575421750546, 0.008682995103299618, -0.0005429668235592544, -0.07635470479726791, -0.032155346125364304, -0.00041200657142326236, 0.03778573125600815, 0.04928429052233696, 0.03377743065357208, 0.07526332885026932, -0.018650317564606667, -0.007930431514978409, -0.017763875424861908, 0.05035093054175377, -0.05364663526415825, -0.030226653441786766, 0.041937392204999924, 0.0846281573176384, 0.030531102791428566, -0.00804639607667923, 0.06929982453584671, -0.05377974733710289, 0.00024981817114166915, 0.005805365275591612, 0.060657285153865814, 0.09324492514133453, 0.08609670400619507, -0.003087632590904832, 0.022470097988843918, -0.018955180421471596, 0.10282409936189651, 0.010609595105051994, 0.06057976186275482, 0.08042899519205093, -0.038730621337890625, 0.04283253103494644, -0.03957190364599228, -0.07486489415168762, 0.04049893841147423, 0.013220138847827911, -0.006964880973100662, -0.04501863941550255, -0.0646347627043724, -0.01119120791554451, 0.07817595452070236, 0.09129618108272552, -0.014411796815693378, -0.0076666041277348995, -0.058559488505125046, -0.005634422414004803, -0.088485486805439, 0.025356721132993698, 0.027010565623641014, -0.040768738836050034, -0.016667835414409637, -0.04427851736545563, 0.06458205729722977, -0.042844388633966446, 0.040652744472026825, 0.03252262994647026, -0.02591877430677414, 0.024412602186203003, -0.06539265811443329, 0.023640135303139687, -0.07005404680967331, -0.04621798172593117, 0.019953597337007523, 0.004439073149114847, -0.03482021391391754, -0.033736828714609146, -0.03435473516583443, 0.05429480969905853, -0.03296791762113571, -0.04820207878947258, 0.011909304186701775, -0.01937350630760193, 0.05272487550973892, 0.04879351705312729, -0.10005427151918411, -6.218628132710897e-33, -0.0010334239341318607, 0.005294653121381998, 0.0028789725620299578, -0.04886287450790405, 0.03457358479499817, 0.0026151754427701235, -0.006373714655637741, -0.13445167243480682, 0.04407941922545433, -0.04311743751168251, -0.02568754553794861, -0.003908407874405384, 0.029340671375393867, -0.07041221112012863, 0.0269940122961998, 0.05450413003563881, -0.017909860238432884, 0.005308663472533226, -0.07510223984718323, -0.008855264633893967, -0.0007782526663504541, 0.08827614784240723, -0.0017969764303416014, 0.06131298840045929, 0.012515957467257977, -0.03633461520075798, 0.10244259983301163, -0.05418919399380684, 0.029756521806120872, -0.015348970890045166, -0.10261952131986618, -0.09678644686937332, -0.11442588269710541, 0.018964366987347603, -0.032037802040576935, -0.032830026000738144, 0.09250959008932114, -0.06852199137210846, -0.04766901582479477, 0.06671106815338135, 0.032814156264066696, -0.014356066472828388, -0.04639948904514313, 0.009150499477982521, -0.04179542884230614, -0.0035412174183875322, -0.016041498631238937, -0.011688075959682465, -0.06007244437932968, 0.06049386411905289, 0.03269566595554352, -0.044691458344459534, -0.07237931340932846, -0.0026130257174372673, -0.04032698646187782, 0.0050577730871737, 0.08333320170640945, 0.018850630149245262, -0.10835613310337067, -0.0211950670927763, 0.07614708691835403, 0.027658803388476372, 0.029733609408140182, 0.010058684274554253, 0.04992624744772911, -0.020723676308989525, -0.024813180789351463, 0.015720684081315994, 0.04476181045174599, -0.03444983810186386, 0.057341545820236206, -0.06991802901029587, -0.11127901077270508, -0.06956075131893158, -0.03595539927482605, 0.03585511073470116, 0.014962092973291874, -0.057108066976070404, -0.03569445013999939, -0.008132172748446465, -0.04909047856926918, 0.05604083091020584, -0.028719184920191765, 0.038322627544403076, 0.061391882598400116, 0.012312821112573147, -0.04078936204314232, -0.07283176481723785, 0.002559521235525608, 0.0759441927075386, -0.043029140681028366, 0.01603648066520691, 0.0058512007817626, 0.13145294785499573, 0.01696993038058281, -5.768934130401249e-8, 0.08269579708576202, 0.02605549246072769, -0.028963597491383553, -0.05269645154476166, 0.007088936399668455, -0.01893949881196022, 0.03369595482945442, 0.05810116231441498, -0.006215449422597885, 0.05251665413379669, 0.04931192100048065, -0.02507988177239895, 0.05896850302815437, 0.026639830321073532, -0.03902962803840637, -0.0225687213242054, 0.04060584679245949, 0.02108312025666237, -0.10646224766969681, -0.0915987491607666, -0.03781050443649292, -0.04809630662202835, -0.02539684809744358, 0.022053875029087067, -0.025360966101288795, -0.0339941643178463, -0.03495704382658005, 0.040209732949733734, 0.014600279740989208, -0.026250416412949562, -0.07826555520296097, 0.018774012103676796, -0.038864873349666595, -0.05662023648619652, -0.04577704519033432, 0.03341185674071312, -0.08129604905843735, -0.028000159189105034, 0.03466597571969032, 0.0944831594824791, 0.005617918446660042, 0.01120911817997694, -0.0530749075114727, 0.08231551945209503, -0.0008592229569330812, 0.019986404106020927, -0.07698020339012146, -0.043934695422649384, 0.026023536920547485, 0.054403554648160934, 0.009050991386175156, -0.01526933629065752, -0.014849384315311909, -0.015451977029442787, -0.03544902801513672, 0.1323927342891693, -0.04590727388858795, -0.035925596952438354, 0.0009513050317764282, 0.06706192344427109, 0.055968254804611206, 0.061991844326257706, -0.09181519597768784, -0.04085719957947731 ]

{ "pdf_file": "YPNQXE4XMRDK6YTLK3B44PDTF4TYHBNY.pdf", "text": " \nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA — THE RESOURCES AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governo r \nCALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION \n1516 Ninth Street \nSacramento, California 95814 \n Main website: www.energy.ca.gov \n \nNotice of Energy Commission \nCommittee-Ordered \nWorkshop for the \nCalico Solar Project (08-AFC-13) \n \nPursuant to direction provided by the presid ing Committee for the Calico Solar Project, \nthe California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) staff will conduct a workshop \nstarting at 1:00 PM on August 24, 2010 . During the August 18, 2010 evidentiary hearing \nfor the Calico Solar Project, the presiding Co mmittee waived the normal notice period for \nthis workshop. Although the pr imary purpose of the workshop is to discuss the Biological \nResources, Cultural Resources, and Tra ffic and Transportation sections of the \nSupplemental Staff Assessm ent, additional topics may be raised as necessary. All \ninterested agencies and members of the public are invited to participate. The workshop \nwill be held as follows: \n \nTuesday, August 24, 2010 \n1:00 P.M. \nCalifornia Energy Commission \nHearing Room A \n1516 Ninth Street \nSacramento, CA 95814 \n \n(Wheelchair Accessible) \n(Map Attached) \n \nTo Participate in the Workshop: \nInstructions to Connect via Te lephone Only (No Computer Access) \n1. Call: 1-866-469-3239 \n2. When prompted enter th is meeting number: 925 642 882 \n3. When it asks for Attendee ID press: # \nInstructions to Connect via Comput er Logon with a Direct Phone Number\n \n1. Go to https://energy.webex.com and enter the unique meet ing number: 925 642 882 \n2. When prompted, enter your informa tion and the following meeting password: \nSITING123! \n3. After you login, a prompt will appear on- screen for you to provide your phone number. \nIn the Number box, type your area code and phone number and click OK to receive a \nDOCKET\n08-AFC-13\n DATE 08/19/10\n RECD.MAR. 008/19/10\nPROOF OF SERVICE ( REVISE D 8/9/10 ) FILED WITH\nORIGINAL MAILED FROM SACRAMENTO ON 8/19/10\nMS \nAugust 19, 2010 2 Calico Solar Workshop Notice call back on your phone for the audio of the m eeting. International callers can use the \n\"Country/Region\" button to help make their connection. \nPurpose of the Workshop \nDuring the August 18, 2010 Evidentiary Hearing fo r the Calico Solar Pr oject, the parties \nraised concerns over the analysis and/or mitigat ion in the Biological Resources, Cultural \nResources, and Traffic and Transportation se ctions of the Supplemental Staff \nAssessment. Since the August 18, 2010 evi dentiary hearing has been continued to \nAugust 25, 2010, the presiding Committee announc ed at the hearings that is was waiving \nthe normal notice period in order to allow the parties to attempt to resolve any issues \nprior to the hearing. \nPublic Participation \nThe Energy Commission’s Public Adviser’s Office provides the public with assistance in \nparticipating in Energy Commission activiti es. If you want information on how to \nparticipate in this proceeding, please contact the Public Adviser, Jennifer Jennings, at: \n(916) 654-4489, toll free at ( 800) 822-6228, by FAX at (916) 654-4493, or by e-mail at \npublic.adviser@energy.state.ca.us If you have a disability and require assistance to \nparticipate, please contact Lourdes Quiroz at lquiroz@energy.state.ca.us or at (916) 654-\n5146 at least five days in advance or the workshop. For those persons with limited \nEnglish knowledge, request interpreter servic es by contacting Christopher Meyer, the \nEnergy Commission Project Manager (c ontact information provided below). \nQuestions \nGeneral information about the proposed Calico Solar Project and related documents are \navailable on the Energy Commission’s website at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingc ases/calicosolar/index.html\n \nPlease direct all news media inquiries to t he Energy Commission’s me dia office at (916) \n654-4989 or e-mail at mediaoffice@energy.state.ca.us . For technical questions on the \nsubject matter, please contact Christopher Meyer, the Energy Commission Project \nManager, at (916) 653-1639 or by e-mail at: cmeyer@energy.state.ca.us or Jim \nStobaugh, the BLM Project Manager, at (775) 861-6478 or by e-mail at: \njim_stobaugh@blm.gov . If you are unable to participat e in the workshop, written \ncomments may be sent to the Energy Commissi on Project Manager electronically or to \nthe Energy Commission’s street address shown on the letterhead of this notice. \n \n Date: \n _ _ \nTERRENCE O’BRIEN, Deputy Director \n Siting, Transmission, and Environmental Protection Division \n \nCalico Proof of Service Lists \nAugust 19, 2010 3 Calico Solar Workshop Notice Tuesday, August 24, 2010 \n1:00 P.M. \nCalifornia Energy Commission \nHearing Room A \n1516 Ninth Street \n Sacramento, CA 95814 \n \n(Wheelchair Accessible) \n \n *indicates change 1\n \n BEFORE THE ENERGY RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT \nCOMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA \n1516 NINTH STREET , SACRAMENTO , CA 95814 \n1-800-822-6228 – WWW .ENERGY .CA.GOV\n \n APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION Docket No. 08-AFC-13 \n \nFor the CALICO SOLAR (Formerly SES Solar One ) \n \nPROOF OF SERVICE \n(Revised 8/9/10) \nU \n \n \nAPPLICANT \nFelicia Bellows \nVice President of Development \n& Project Manager \nTessera Solar \n4800 North Scottsdale Road, \n#5500 \nScottsdale, AZ 85251 \nfelicia.bellows@tesserasolar.com \n \nCONSULTANT \nAngela Leiba \nAFC Project Manager \nURS Corporation \n1615 Murray Canyon Rd., \n#1000 \nSan Diego, CA 92108 \nangela_leiba@URSCorp.com \n APPLICANT’S COUNSEL\n \nAllan J. Thompson \nAttorney at Law \n21 C Orinda Way #314 \nOrinda, CA 94563 \nallanori@comcast.net \n \nElla Foley Gannon, Partner \nBingham McCutchen, LLP \nThree Embarcadero Center \nSan Francisco, CA 94111 \nella.gannon@bingham.com \n \n \n \n \n \n \nINTERESTED AGENCIES \nCalifornia ISO \ne-recipient@caiso.com \n \nJim Stobaugh \nBLM – Nevada State Office \nP.O. Box 12000 \nReno, NV 89520 \njim_stobaugh@blm.gov \n \nRich Rotte, Project Manager \nBureau of Land Management \nBarstow Field Office \n2601 Barstow Road \nBarstow, CA 92311 \nrichard_rotte@blm.gov \n \nBecky Jones \nCalifornia Department of \nFish & Game \n36431 41st Street East \nPalmdale, CA 93552 dfgpalm@adelphia.net\n \n \nINTERVENORS \nCounty of San Bernardino \nRuth E. Stringer, \nCounty Counsel \nBart W. Brizzee, \nDeputy County Counsel \n385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, \n4th Floor \nSan Bernardino, CA 92415- \nbbrizzee@cc.sbcounty.gov \n \n \n \n \nCalifornia Unions for Reliable \nEnergy (CURE) \nc/o: Loulena A. Miles, \nMarc D. Joseph \nAdams Broadwell Joseph \n& Cardozo \n601 Gateway Boulevard, Ste. 1000 \nSouth San Francisco, CA 94080 \nlmiles@adamsbroadwell.com \n \nDefenders of Wildlife \nJoshua Basofin \n1303 J Street, Suite 270 \nSacramento, Ca lifornia 95814 \ne-mail service preferred \njbasofin@defenders.org \n \nSociety for the Conservation of \nBighorn Sheep \nBob Burke & Gary Thomas \nP.O. Box 1407 Yermo, CA 92398 \n \ncameracoordinator@sheepsociety.com \n \nBasin and Range Watch \nLaura Cunningham & \nKevin Emmerich \nP.O. Box 70 \nBeatty, NV 89003 \natomictoadranch@netzero.net \n \n \n \n \n \n *indicates change 2INTERVENORS CONT. \n \nPatrick C. Jackson \n600 N. Darwood Avenue \nSan Dimas, CA 91773 \ne-mail service preferred \nochsjack@earthlink.net \n \nGloria D. Smith, Senior Attorney \n*Travis Ritchie \nSierra Club \n85 Second Street, Second floor \nSan Francisco, CA 94105 \ngloria.smith@sierraclub.org \ntravis.ritchie@sierraclub.org \n \nNewberry Community \nService District \nWayne W. Weierbach \nP.O. Box 206 \nNewberry Springs, CA 92365 \nnewberryCSD@gmail.com \n \nCynthia Lea Burch \nSteven A. Lamb \nAnne Alexander \nKatten Muchin Rosenman LLP \n2029 Century Park East, \nSte. 2700 \nLos Angeles, CA 90067-3012 \nCynthia.burch@kattenlaw.com \nSteven.lamb@kattenlaw.com \nAnne.alexander@kattenlaw.com \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n ENERGY COMMISSION \n \nANTHONY EGGERT \nCommissioner and Presiding Member \naeggert@energy.state.ca.us \n \nJEFFREY D. BYRON \nCommissioner and Associate Member \njbyron@energy.state.ca.us \n \nPaul Kramer \nHearing Officer \npkramer@energy.state.ca.us \n \nLorraine White, Adviser to \nCommissioner Eggert \ne-mail service preferred \nlwhite@energy.state.ca.us \n \nKristy Chew, Adviser to \nCommissioner Byron \ne-mail service preferred \nkchew@energy.state.ca.us \n \nCaryn Holmes \nStaff Counsel \ncholmes@energy.state.ca.us \n \nSteve Adams \nCo-Staff Counsel \nsadams@energy.state.ca.us \n \nChristopher Meyer \nProject Manager \ncmeyer@energy.state.ca.us \n \nJennifer Jennings \nPublic Adviser \ne-mail service preferred \npublicadviser@energy.state.ca.us \n *indicates change 3 \nDECLARATION OF SERVICE \n \n \nI, Maria Santourdjian , declare that on August 19, 2010 , I served and filed copies of the attached Notice of Energy \nCommission Committee-Ordered Workshop , dated August 19, 2010 . The original document, filed with the Docket \nUnit, is accompanied by a copy of the most recent Proof of Service list, located on the web page for this project at: \n[www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/solarone] . \n \nThe documents have been sent to both the other parties in this proceeding (as shown on the Proof of Service list) \nand to the Commission’s Docket Unit, in the following manner: \n \n(Check all that Apply ) \n \nFOR SERVICE TO ALL OTHER PARTIES : \n \nx sent electronically to all email addresses on the Proof of Service list; \n by personal delivery; \n by delivering on this date, for mailing with the United States Postal Service with first-class postage thereon \nfully prepaid, to the name and address of the person served, for mailing that same day in the ordinary \ncourse of business; that the envelope was sealed and placed for collection and mailing on that date to those addresses NOT marked “email preferred.” \n \nAND \nF\nOR FILING WITH THE ENERGY COMMISSION : \n sending an original paper copy and one electronic copy, mailed and emailed respectively, to the address \nbelow ( preferred method ); \nOR \n depositing in the mail an original and 12 paper copies, as follows: \n \n CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION \n Attn: Docket No. 08-AFC-13 \n 1516 Ninth Street, MS-4 \n Sacramento, CA 95814-5512 \n docket@energy.state.ca.us \n \n \nI declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, that I am employed in the county where this \nmailing occurred, and that I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the proceeding. \n O r i g i n a l S i g n e d b y : \n \n Maria Santourdjian \n " }

[ -0.0038360042963176966, 0.0684528797864914, -0.0023281718604266644, 0.029813209548592567, -0.019456014037132263, -0.04690702632069588, -0.05968058109283447, 0.07866955548524857, -0.010608668439090252, 0.054121632128953934, 0.0620480552315712, 0.07391034066677094, -0.006287579424679279, 0.061346083879470825, 0.03236059471964836, -0.0699290856719017, -0.05597587674856186, 0.048756178468465805, -0.040892716497182846, -0.032227665185928345, -0.04394053667783737, 0.0008553804946132004, 0.066420778632164, 0.025362754240632057, 0.011915408074855804, -0.02429351583123207, 0.07508793473243713, -0.030436784029006958, -0.02994035743176937, 0.01603851653635502, -0.046396590769290924, 0.07894774526357651, 0.0147552490234375, -0.0075540691614151, -0.00144300889223814, 0.03126314654946327, 0.07834123820066452, 0.08696284890174866, 0.03735519200563431, 0.01466420479118824, -0.14587081968784332, -0.041829608380794525, 0.025808151811361313, -0.07263597846031189, 0.04540390893816948, 0.011320956982672215, -0.05442826822400093, -0.06199585646390915, -0.03399660810828209, 0.0028777297120541334, -0.06206037476658821, -0.02720809169113636, 0.05221538618206978, 0.018308032304048538, 0.024300772696733475, 0.015087532810866833, -0.010559030808508396, -0.0037248884327709675, -0.08524195104837418, 0.0002753759326878935, -0.10038331151008606, 0.011590586975216866, -0.03843970596790314, 0.01625836081802845, 0.02852807566523552, -0.06428847461938858, -0.030206944793462753, 0.043444667011499405, -0.051700230687856674, 0.003579992102459073, 0.09254082292318344, 0.0004892562865279615, -0.04310512915253639, 0.08574332296848297, -0.0344807393848896, -0.04181070625782013, -0.033248499035835266, 0.05431972071528435, 0.026130657643079758, -0.09872209280729294, 0.1305467039346695, 0.03147174045443535, 0.01616159826517105, -0.08582834154367447, -0.03281807154417038, 0.0009736284264363348, -0.037721116095781326, -0.03741108626127243, 0.017390428110957146, -0.004398728720843792, 0.04846205189824104, -0.013799355365335941, 0.008090542629361153, 0.10422133654356003, 0.046318039298057556, -0.053833089768886566, 0.017833124846220016, 0.03823766112327576, -0.005435277707874775, 0.010316742584109306, 0.005924619268625975, 0.010969916358590126, 0.024932021275162697, 0.00006680710794171318, -0.06611525267362595, 0.021314315497875214, -0.042840976268053055, -0.015064639039337635, -0.04604730010032654, -0.008856574073433876, -0.054513119161129, 0.026032403111457825, -0.1148383840918541, -0.010728388093411922, -0.006956011988222599, -0.020136643201112747, 0.09568624943494797, 0.09320463985204697, -0.03231906518340111, 0.03651702404022217, 0.05895286425948143, -0.058526091277599335, -0.008080986328423023, -0.009221019223332405, -0.009305997751653194, -0.04911951720714569, -0.002589970361441374, 1.614961730084831e-33, 0.12455064058303833, 0.025917237624526024, -0.013860506005585194, 0.07444920390844345, -0.08800338208675385, -0.04294644296169281, -0.029061254113912582, 0.05727913975715637, 0.023154227063059807, -0.012831964530050755, -0.008665457367897034, 0.0721416100859642, -0.012775788083672523, -0.020691735669970512, 0.11352269351482391, -0.04077072814106941, -0.07455398142337799, 0.027635956183075905, 0.007002634461969137, 0.08731464296579361, 0.05207737162709236, -0.06830929219722748, 0.03833891451358795, -0.06001328304409981, 0.006941942032426596, 0.005178895778954029, 0.025203857570886612, -0.06907054781913757, -0.05196283757686615, 0.006510147824883461, 0.015491120517253876, -0.09648455679416656, -0.08808013051748276, -0.012005791068077087, -0.010678768157958984, -0.0007591799949295819, 0.07643382996320724, -0.02866929955780506, 0.04353618621826172, -0.01601259410381317, 0.01134566031396389, -0.06615124642848969, 0.04095759987831116, 0.025135532021522522, 0.10042455047369003, 0.06519428640604019, 0.056893736124038696, -0.022850144654512405, 0.007850661873817444, 0.09315937757492065, -0.06346970796585083, -0.0661417543888092, -0.030266722664237022, -0.06753463298082352, 0.1245247945189476, 0.07903385907411575, -0.03041348047554493, 0.045690253376960754, -0.032376985996961594, -0.004962005186825991, -0.004208293743431568, 0.02850603125989437, -0.10446900129318237, 0.030266253277659416, 0.005492092575877905, 0.020278628915548325, -0.02004801668226719, -0.04497202858328819, 0.07911213487386703, -0.035573262721300125, -0.03377213329076767, -0.03407648578286171, -0.053076907992362976, 0.04311005398631096, 0.04720022901892662, -0.018068550154566765, -0.002404096769168973, -0.0036847752053290606, 0.006421325262635946, -0.0078048910945653915, -0.07717063277959824, 0.019120609387755394, -0.005664571654051542, -0.031489357352256775, 0.040251653641462326, 0.11129385977983475, 0.038973163813352585, 0.019939947873353958, 0.10331609845161438, 0.0340610072016716, 0.08042088150978088, -0.05576294660568237, -0.0033409621100872755, 0.013537058606743813, 0.0168568454682827, -3.4678247823348765e-33, -0.033097364008426666, 0.012416362762451172, -0.08972448110580444, 0.042235393077135086, 0.047109123319387436, 0.0011195797706022859, 0.025896573439240456, 0.01093865092843771, -0.021412119269371033, -0.062203552573919296, -0.018705643713474274, -0.08746951818466187, 0.02537361904978752, 0.02233157493174076, 0.0014878453221172094, 0.012358762323856354, -0.038579247891902924, 0.028337327763438225, -0.060920149087905884, 0.03053687885403633, 0.04574635252356529, 0.00409975228831172, 0.01015317440032959, -0.06473975628614426, -0.05756406858563423, -0.05168430134654045, -0.007448239717632532, 0.006082956679165363, -0.02890182100236416, 0.04892647638916969, 0.09672699123620987, -0.08225142955780029, -0.024880506098270416, 0.04461526498198509, -0.06293431669473648, 0.005963487550616264, 0.013156802393496037, -0.01364088524132967, -0.014736814424395561, 0.08215867727994919, -0.06446877866983414, 0.0037955166772007942, -0.022865435108542442, -0.08637480437755585, -0.12770216166973114, -0.008961445651948452, -0.10021992772817612, 0.06885616481304169, 0.010869409888982773, -0.11759819090366364, 0.051674652844667435, -0.01656406931579113, -0.009655139409005642, -0.029339667409658432, 0.016797441989183426, -0.08229762315750122, 0.050208546221256256, -0.04927543178200722, -0.12126578390598297, 0.07318879663944244, 0.128141850233078, -0.0003042042371816933, -0.010315795429050922, 0.061612892895936966, -0.0016199760138988495, -0.04634733870625496, 0.06698771566152573, 0.06559634953737259, -0.026933418586850166, 0.002354759257286787, 0.030026385560631752, -0.03971764072775841, 0.08303673565387726, -0.01076558418571949, -0.004236267413944006, 0.013051092624664307, 0.029666157439351082, -0.0064284405671060085, 0.0865253433585167, -0.0129375159740448, 0.01883215270936489, -0.044430073350667953, -0.023471128195524216, -0.03414827957749367, -0.04278683662414551, 0.08364512771368027, -0.003883209777995944, 0.009343917481601238, 0.018312625586986542, -0.09500564634799957, -0.02715730480849743, -0.03293081372976303, 0.016660159453749657, -0.023679684847593307, -0.02047777734696865, -5.364663735463182e-8, 0.04077577218413353, -0.10002592951059341, -0.042784444987773895, -0.03426554054021835, -0.021694524213671684, -0.02495139092206955, -0.0006182952201925218, 0.003555969800800085, 0.0030350482556968927, 0.06272497028112411, -0.03542270511388779, 0.05279433727264404, 0.03510917350649834, 0.02042030170559883, 0.0715201273560524, -0.004608764313161373, 0.08246375620365143, 0.05142921209335327, 0.0039857495576143265, -0.002094072988256812, 0.14140696823596954, -0.004805495031177998, -0.0370795838534832, -0.10265283286571503, -0.0008790124556981027, 0.07152577489614487, -0.041630569845438004, -0.020902641117572784, -0.03697215020656586, 0.02946283668279648, -0.0001711371587589383, 0.021188538521528244, -0.06048644706606865, -0.08305910974740982, 0.011009519919753075, -0.01051503699272871, 0.026374634355306625, -0.019012052565813065, -0.07620278000831604, 0.04955718293786049, -0.011391684412956238, -0.08066534996032715, 0.012972918339073658, 0.0447743684053421, 0.07908714562654495, -0.05076056346297264, -0.036810051649808884, 0.07349918782711029, 0.02814229018986225, 0.02341560088098049, -0.037872929126024246, -0.022499598562717438, 0.041614409536123276, -0.09932011365890503, -0.02597186528146267, 0.04431789740920067, 0.013917571865022182, -0.08219727128744125, -0.04739811271429062, 0.044189099222421646, 0.10638285428285599, 0.010907353833317757, -0.017812350764870644, 0.07899429649114609 ]

{ "pdf_file": "ROFAK5ST6GGKDWOVZ4YC6QI5GYOJBO4I.pdf", "text": "Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook\nNo.4, December, 2009, pp.37-51\nThe Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in \nJapan: A Methodological Consideration\nOtsuka , Yutaka*\nThe purpose of this article is not to discuss fieldwork at large but rather \nto examine the position and role of the research method in one discipline, com -\nparative education. For this purpose, first of all, the content of articles pub-\nlished by the Japan Comparative Education Society’ s journal over the past 35 years is analyzed. Based on this analysis, the implications, significance as well as apprehension surrounding doing fieldwork in comparative studies of educa -\ntion are then discussed. There are 504 articles published from the first volume to the latest No. 39. The classification based on a full reading of all the articles indicates 86 (approximately 17.1%) are found to be based on the data and information collected and formed by the researchers themselves with the vari -\nous techniques in their fields. While studies about Western advanced countries account for a majority in all articles, those utilizing various techniques in the field remain limited at 20. The rest of the fieldwork-based articles concern developing countries. However, an increasing number of fieldwork-based stud -\nies have been appearing in the JCES journal. Not only has the speed of this increase been accelerating, but also the quality of the fieldwork seems to have been improving gradually. Similarly, countries and areas to be the object of investigation have been diversifying. What is perhaps the most salient phenom -\nenon is that studies centering on advanced Western countries are also coming to adopt fieldwork as their primary research method. These recent academic trends may indicate that studies in Comparative Education in Japan are finally coming into their own: what was long considered a ‘peripheral’ or ‘consumer’ position in academia is now being replaced with hope for making original and active contributions to research in the field.\n* Hiroshima University\n e-mail: yotsuka@hiroshima-u.ac.jpFieldwork is defined loosely as an investigation technique for visiting sites in person with \na certain purpose in mind, making direct observations, interviewing parties concerned, conducting \nquestionnaire surveys, and extracting historical records and data on the spot in order to get scien -\ntifically objective results. It has been described extensively over the years as a distinct research method. Literature focusing on following sound interview techniques, the creation, distribution and interpretation of questionnaires, the intricacies of reliable participant observation, the taking of Otsuka ,Yutaka 38\naccurate field-notes and the writing of reports based on field experiences are too numerous to men -\ntion.1 In the field of comparative education, which inherently involves the analysis of foreign coun -\ntry contexts or different cultural environments, fieldwork has been attracting more and more \nattention as an effective and informative research method.\nThe purpose of this article is not to discuss the merits and processes of fieldwork at large, \nbut rather to confine the argument to examining the position and role of the method in one disci -\npline, comparative education. Since a vast majority of comparative educators in Japan maintain membership in the Japan Comparative Education Society (JCES)\n2, the author will closely review \nthe Society’s past activities and clarify how fieldwork has been conducted and considered on vari -\nous occasions. More concretely, contents of the articles published by the Society’s journal over the past 35 years will first be analyzed to ascertain their research method s. Secondly, based on this \nanalysis, the implications, significance, and apprehension surrounding doing fieldwork in compara -\ntive studies of education are then discussed.\n1 Recognition of Fieldwork in the Initial Stage of JCES Development\nThe JCES started to publish its journal in 1974, the 10th year following its formal inaugu -\nration in 1965\n3. The importance of fieldwork was recognized from the very beginning, as seen in \nvarious articles in the first issue of the journal. For example, while advocating the ‘cultural anthro -\npology approach’, Tsuneo Ayabe listed the problems of conducting educational research using this \nmethod in the past as follows: “Without carefully selecting research targets and building up and scrutinizing precise hypotheses beforehand, research was actually conducted. .... It was not until visiting the research site and incidentally coming across some educational issues that a survey was started. .... Past studies lacked delving into the cognitive side of the context in the culture concerned.”\n4\nSubsequently, in proposals aimed at the improvement of research, Ayabe pointed out the \nnecessity of ‘educational ethnographic’ study based on in-depth participant observation over an extended period of time. He also emphasized the importance of the ‘practical use of field survey method’, referring not merely to the collection of ready-made materials at universities, government offices, various kinds of schools, libraries, and research institutes located in urban cities of the country concerned, but also in conducting first-hand research in rural areas where literature and data are generally scarce. As for his interpretation of ‘practical use of a field research methods’, he added that “it does not include the group tour and inspection tour staying in a hotel, or mere study abroad, but is a means to carry out the investigation of an educational problem with concrete awareness, by staying a long time in a selected spot, learning the local language, eating the local food, and living the same life with local people.”\n5\nIn the article in the same edition entitled in “The Area Studies in the Field of Comparative \nEducation in Japan; The Example of Studying German Education,” Masaharu Amano suggested that “comparative education studies in Japan probably need to advance more functional and effec -\ntive research by introducing joint research systems and field surveys.”\n6 It is noteworthy that the \nimportance of fieldwork was pointed out from the standpoint of a researcher involved in the stud-ies of advanced nations or Western countries.\nIn addition, Michiya Shimbori asserted that a mere study of education in a foreign country \ncould not be called “comparative education study, and education in two or more foreign countries The Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in Japan: A Methodological Consideration 39\nshould be compared methodologically and systematically”7, explaining that numerous approaches \nare conceivable. However, it is not easy for Japanese researchers in particular to stay in a foreign \ncountry long enough to master educational and various other aspects of the country, nor is travel to foreign countries always easily accomplished. Moreover, even if researchers are able to secure time and travel, average researchers still cannot easily grasp firsthand information due to restric -\ntions of language or lifestyle habits. Therefore, Shimbori suggested that some alternative methods for comparison depending on literature ought to be developed, claiming that “ Only in this way we \ncan close the gap with Europe and American researchers who have few differences between a for -\neign country and their own country ”\n8 [Italics not in the original]. From this assertion, it can be \nsurmised that Shimbori envisaged mainly the study of Western countries; other areas seem to have been overlooked when forming his hypothesis, because it is not reasonable to state that Indonesia and China, for example, are countries with “few differences” for European and American research -\ners. Rather, it should be considered that sensitive and cognitive distance toward these countries is equally challenging for researchers, whether they are Japanese, European or American.\nAt any rate, judging from the above-mentioned arguments presented in the initial stages of \nthe development of the JCES, it can be observed that fieldwork methods were still in the early stages in terms of how they could be effectively used. In fact, two individual research articles appearing in the first edition of the journal as examples of actual research practice (i.e., “Arinori Mori and Horace Mann” by Akie Shoko and “A Study of the International Aims of Education” by Takashi Uehara) were both based on the results of the analysis of existing literature and published data.\n2 Fieldwork Appearing as a Research Method\nThe issue of fieldwork was periodically taken up as a special topic in the JCES journal. In \nthe 1999 Special Edition of the journal (No.25) dealing with ‘New Perspectives of Comparative \nEducation’, we see a number of contributors referring to fieldwork as a research method. Minoru Ishizuki wrote that “looking at recent research trends in Japan, it is remarkable that researchers of the younger generation in particular are actively going abroad, energetically conducting field sur -\nveys, and gathering information in the areas concerned.”\n9 He also pointed out “the areas of inves -\ntigation are extending wider to include Africa, Central and South America and Oceania, which had not received much attention in the past.”\n10 Shinichi Suzuki emphasized the necessity “to engage \ndirectly by reflecting, developing and experimenting (i.e., conducting fieldwork) in relation to the systematization of comparative education.”\n11 Akira Ninomiya expressed his pleasure that opportu -\nnities for young researchers to conduct overseas research through the so-called “Tokubetsu Kenkyuin Seido” or “special researcher program” of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), have increased, and that significantly more researchers are able to have direct experience in devel-oping countries as Japan Overseas Cooperation V olunteers of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)\n12. Takeshi Sasamori discussed the relation between comparative education and area \nstudies from the viewpoint as a specialist of Oceania area studies. He indicated the importance of “community surveys” and asserted that “the newest data and literature are difficult to acquire, espe-cially with respect to countries in the South Pacific. Therefore, [fieldwork] is the best method for collecting data and information.”\n13\nIn the same edition, Yokuo Murata and Megumi Shibuya discussed the relationship between Otsuka ,Yutaka 40\ncomparative education and area studies as specialists of Southeast Asia. They noted that in 10 vol -\numes (No. 15 to 24) of JCES journals, 18 articles had dealt with education in Southeast Asia, \nincluding many studies in which contributors conducted original data collection and fieldwork while staying for a relatively long period of time in the areas concerned. As for the research meth -\nodology “most articles are based on a review of the literature using primary sources .... In addi -\ntion, there are many studies in which researchers have utilized participant observation, interviews, questionnaire surveys, scholastic ability tests, etc.”\n14 Specifically, the authors found that “among \nthese 18 articles, 6 studies utilized participant observation, 9 conducted interviews, and 4 did ques -\ntionnaire surveys, which included either multiple choice or open-ended questions.”15\nIn the 2001 Special Editon of the journal (No. 27) entitled “The Frontier of Area Studies \nin Education”, there is a review of studies concerning education in various contexts throughout the world, and a discussion of future directions for research. The contributors to this Special Edition were Hisao Takekuma (Southeast Asia), Hideaki Shibuya (South Asia), Yasuo Saito (Latin America), Setsuo Nishino (Islamic countries in Southeast Asia), Tadashi Endo (Russia and the Soviet Union) and Yutaka Kido (Europe). Each author is a specialist who has engaged in educational research in their respective areas over many years as JCES members, and their intimate knowledge is reflected in each article. Several articles in this Special Edition, for example, those by Takekuma, Shibuya, Nishino and Endo, also refer to domestic and international trends in methods of fieldwork.\nTable I classifies the content of JCES journal articles by country and other research themes, \nillustrating how research foci and methodology within the JCES have evolved over time.\nAs indicated in Table I, looking back at all the articles published by the Journal, there were \n504\n16 published from the first volume to No. 39. If we narrow our focus to single countries (with \nthe exception of Japan) such as the United States and China, articles dealing with advanced coun-tries in Europe and America received a majority of attention throughout the whole period. However, if we consider change over each ten year period, it readily becomes apparent that articles dealing with Asia, Oceania and other developing countries have been increasing. In addition, the number of articles dealing with single countries seldom written about in the past has been increasing rapidly.\nAs seen in Figure I, among 504 articles, 86 (approximately 17.1%) are found to be based \non original data and information collected and formed using various techniques in authors’ respec -\ntive fields. This classification is based on a full reading of all 504 articles. These 86 articles are distinguished by the criterion that the authors’ research techniques including questionnaires, inter -\nviews, and observations in their respective fields are explicitly indicated in any part of the article. It appears that following edition No. 19 of the Journal, or since the beginning of the 1990s, research utilizing fieldwork has come to be seen with increasing regularity in JCES publications. Therefore, the period before this may be considered a ‘run-up stage.’ If we count the number of articles based on fieldwork in all 10 volumes of the Journal, 10 appeared in Nos.1–10, 9 in Nos.11–20, 29 in Nos. 21–30 and 38 in Nos.31–39. There is a particularly noticeable jump in the more recent 9 vol -\numes, which were published within the last 5 years.\nAn article referring to fieldwork investigation appeared for the first time in the Journal in \nthe 1976 volume (No.3). In “The Problems in Comprehensive Schools in Southeast Asia: A Thai Case,” Shunichi Nishimura analyzed various problems involved in the movement toward the com-prehensive school system which was a global thrust of education reform at that time. Nishimura mentioned having conducted an analysis “based on my own experience of on-the-spot inquiries.”\n17 \nWhile the article does not emphasize the use of fieldwork methodology per se, it nevertheless rep - The Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in Japan: A Methodological Consideration 41\nTable I　Article Content in JCES journals by Country and Other Research Themes\nTarget Country or Topic No.1–10 No.11–20 No.21–30 No.31–39 Total\nSingle CountryJapan 18 14 8 4 44\nU. S. 20 22 12 8 62\nU. K. 11 11 10 3 35\nGermany 5 7 11 6 29\nFrance 4 9 4 2 19\nRussia (U. S. S. R) 5 4 3 1 13\nSweden 4 3 0 3 10\nCanada 1 3 1 1 6\nChina 1 7 11 7 26\nKorea 5 3 2 4 14\nThailand 1 5 6 5 17\nIndia 1 2 3 2 8\nIndonesia 0 4 5 0 9\nMalaysia 0 5 3 0 8\nPhilippines 1 1 2 1 5\nAustralia 1 4 7 3 15\nNew Zealand 0 1 1 2 4\nOthers (single country)* 0 6 11 16 33\nSubtotal 78 111 100 68 357\nRegion/\nMultiple CountriesSoutheast Asia 1 1 0 2 4\nAsia 2 0 1 0 3\nCentral & South America 0 1 1 1 3\nComparison (multiple countries) 15 7 7 12 41\nAfrica 0 0 0 2 2\nSubtotal 18 9 9 17 53\nOther TopicInternational Organization** 10 1 3 2 16\nTheory/Methodology 33 25 17 3 78\nSubtotal 44 26 20 5 95\nTotal 139 146 129 90 504\nNote: * Other single countries include Mexico, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Poland, Syria, Lebanon, Bangladesh, Chile, \nKenya, Afghanistan, Turkey, Belgium, Tanzania, Greece and Taiwan.\n ** International organizations include the World Bank, UNESCO, OECD, EC and EU.\nFigure I　Research Method used in JCES Journal Articles (Percentage) Otsuka ,Yutaka 42\nresents a significant contribution in being the earliest Society publication to report on findings \nbased on this approach. This is especially true if we consider the difficulty in traveling to a foreign country to obtain detailed firsthand information in those days.\nIn addition, we can find five follow-up articles in this particular volume of the Journal that \nfollowed the previous volume focusing on ‘Comparative Studies of Educational Research Systems in Various Countries.’ This study was being systematically conducted as a common research proj -\nect by JCES members at that time. Although these articles are written based mostly on information quoted from official documents, books and research articles published in the countries concerned, there is an explanation in Taneo Harada’s article, “General View” that “for obtaining scarce (infor -\nmation) or verifying questionable facts, ... a very practical method is to delegate investigative responsibilities to those Society members currently visiting or living in the country in question, and to supplement and collect the information they provide.”\n18\nAmong the previously mentioned 86 articles published by the Journal for which the authors \ncollected data through fieldwork (see Table II), only 20 (23.3%) were on Western advanced coun -\ntries, whereas the overwhelming majority, 65 articles (75.6%) were concerned with non-Western areas, especially those located in Asia.\n19 In addition to these, although not clearly mentioned in the \narticles themselves, Masahiro Tejima’s “The Introduction of Islamic Values into Environmental Education in Malaysia” \n20 and Hirotaka Nanbu’s “The Process of Preparing Higher Education \nFaculty in China” 21 implicitly included the contents of interviews with persons concerned in those \nTable II　Countries and/or Areas Studied Using Fieldwork\nBulletin No.\nCountry/region 1 2 3 456 7 89 10 1112 13 141516 17 1819 20 21 22 23 242526 27 2829 30 31 32 33 343536 37 3839Total\nThailand 1 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 15\nKorea 1 1 1 1 1 1 6\nPhilippines 1 1 1 3\nMalaysia 1 1 1 3\nSingapore 1 1\nChina 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8\nIndonesia 2 1 1 1 5\nIndia 1 1 2 4\nVietnam 1 1\nButan/Burunei 1 1\nMyanmer 1 1\nBangladesh 1 1\nAfganistan 1 1\nNepal 1 1 2\nCambodia 1 1\nTaiwan 1 1\nSoutheast Asia 1 1\nSyria/Lebanon 1 1\nLebanon 1 1\nLatin America 1 1\nTanzania 1 1 2\nKenya 1 1\nNew Zealand 1 1 2\nAustralia 1 1\nUzbekistan 1 1\nRussia(USSR) 1 1\nUnited States 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 9\nGermany 1 1 1 1 1 5\nCanada 1 1\nUnited Kingdom 1 1\nBelgium/Holland 1** 1 2\nSweden 1 1\nGlobal 1*** 1\n0 0 1 1 2 02 1 1 2 0 0 1010203 2 42 2 3 2 2 3 1 5 5 6 4 4 6 5 3 3 3 4 86\nNote: * Fieldwork was conducted in Thailand and partly in Malaysia. ** Fieldwork was conducted in Belgium and Holland. *** Countries studied include the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Denmark, United Kingdom \nand Korea. The Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in Japan: A Methodological Consideration 43\ncountries. Koro Suzuki’s “Islamic Education in Public Primary and Secondary Schools in Southern \nThailand” 22 was also based on reports of local education administration offices in Southern Thailand, \nwhich are not easily accessible in Japan, and seem to have been collected on the spot. However, these articles were not counted as having been the result of fieldwork-based research.\nWhile studies of advanced countries in the West account for a majority of all articles pub -\nlished by the Journal as mentioned in Table I, those utilizing various fieldwork techniques remain limited at 20. How might this fact be interpreted? For researchers who are involved in the study of the Western world, is it sufficient merely to rely on a wealth of existing data in order to form and meaningfully test a hypothesis? Unfortunately, in my opinion, there seems to be an overwhelm -\ning reliance on existing research results produced in advanced Western countries, based perhaps on a ‘servile spirit’ (subordinate consciousness) of sorts on the part of Japanese researchers in terms of research. In the light of this possibility, above-mentioned Masaharu Amano’s assertion seems to exhibit more luster.\n3 Re-examining “Fieldwork”\nAlthough there appear to be relatively more articles reporting findings based on ‘fieldwork’ \nundertaken in Asian countries, whether researchers’ practices in the field are in fact worthy of the \nterm should also be strictly examined from the following viewpoints.\nFirst of all, fieldwork becomes self-contained only after appropriate activity is made in each \nphase of the process, i.e.: (1) before going into the field, (2) in the field, and (3) after returning from the field. Although the amount of data and information and the ease of access to these have increased enormously in the present global and Internet age, are we able to fully digest the data and information which are available before going to the actual site? In recent years, while some vital details remain difficult to obtain, much information may be obtained instantly by connecting to the World Wide Web from any access point around the globe.\n23\nSecond, the methodological processes that distinguish ‘fieldwork’ from other approaches \nmust be revisited. As indicated in Table III, in earlier days an overwhelming majority of the field-work by Society members was based on questionnaire surveys, with only a few studies using addi -\ntional interviews and observations. The situation gradually changed as studies based on interviews increased. When we examine the methods utilized by the 86 fieldwork-based studies, interviews, questionnaires and observations account for 49, 29 and 11 projects respectively, although some researchers combined these methods and therefore the total exceeds 86 studies.\nRegardless of the methods used, how can we ensure representativeness and typicality of \nplace, institution or respondent? Local research areas in which means of transportation are difficult to secure require an abundance of energy and self-initiative. Nevertheless, the research rationale must be assessed rigorously; even if a study is worthy of a prize for effort, it may not be very use -\nful in terms of building new theories, providing new knowledge, or contributing otherwise to the field of comparative education.\nMoreover, in a humanistic educational science which has as its core purpose the understand -\ning of human being, face-to-face communication, direct dialog and personal contextual experience are undeniably the most effective research methods. While questionnaire surveys are practical alter -\nnatives to meeting with respondents personally, comparative educationalists are obliged to strive to discern the ‘heart of the matter’ through personal engagement and involvement. It is the field Otsuka ,Yutaka 44\nTable III　Method and Extent of Fieldwork (arranged by published sequence)\nBulletin No. Article No. Method of Investigation Unit or Target of Analysis Country/Region\n 3 1 fact-finding not clear Thailand\n 4 1 questionnaire/interview 6 villages Thailand/Malaysia\n 51\n2questionnairefact-findingcollege students13 schools of selected statesThailandUnited States\n 712questionnairequestionnairea few cities13 high schools of one stateKoreaUnited States\n 8 1 questionnaire selected cities Korea\n 9 1 fact-finding selected schools United States\n1012questionnairequestionnaireselected cities3 schoolsKoreaUnited States\n13 1 fact-finding one city Canada\n15 1 observation one community Philippines\n1712questionnaireinterview20 villages of 8 counties3 schoolsThailandMalaysia\n19123interview/observationquestionnairequestionnaireone villageone university3 schoolsThailandMalaysiaSingapore\n2012interviewfact-finding3 counties in one provinceselected universitiesThailandChina\n211234questionnairefact-findinginterviewobservationcollege students at one univesityone village high schooladminstrators in 3 provincesone schoolThailandPhilippinesIndonesiaIndonesia\n2212questionnaireinterview/observation11 schoolsone villageThailandIndonesia\n2312interviewobservation2 citiesclassroom of a schoolChinaIndonesia\n24123questionnaireinterview/observation/questionnaireinterview4 countiesone stateselected institutionsChinaIndiaVietnam\n2512interviewfact-findingone universitynot clearChinaSyria/Lebanon\n2612questionnaire/interviewfact-findingone countynot clearThailandBrunei/Bhutan\n27123questionnaireinterviewquestionnaire2 statesone districtone school districtIndiaTanzaniaUnited States\n28 1 questionnaire 3 districts Nepal\n2912345questionnairequestionnaireinterviewinterview/observationquestionnaireselected schools in one state2 colleges and 11 schools4 villages2 schools in one state4 schools in one cityMalaysiaMyanmarBangladeshUnited StatesUnited Kingdom\n3012345fact-findinginterviewinterviewinterviewinterview3 schools in 3 areas7 schools in one city2 schools in one countyone school and one councilselected schools in 3 statesThailandChinaKenyaAustraliaUnited States\n31123456interviewinterview/observationinterviewfact-findinginterviewinterview2 administrative officesone schoolone research instituteone cityselected persons8 countriesThailandThailandKoreaAfganistanLatin America8 countries\n321234interviewquestionnaireinterviewinterviewselected institutions27 schools in 6 countiesone school13 schoolsChinaNepalGermanyHolland/Belgium\n331234interview/observationinterview/observationinterviewinterviewselected schools in 2 areasselected schoolsone schoolone administrative officesPhilippinesLebanonTanzaniaRussia\n34123456interviewinterviewquestionnairefact-findinginterviewinterviewMinsitry of Educationselected personsteacher training collegesselected institutions in 2 statesone scholarselected personsThailandNew ZealandUnited StatesUnited StatesGermanySweden\n3512345questionnaireinterviewfact-findinginterviewinterviewone countyselected persons at one universityselected institutionsselected schools10 schools in 2 citiesThailandKoreaChinaUzbekistanHolland\n36123questionnaire/observationinterviewquestionnaire/interview3 citiesone school13 college studentsIndonesiaCambodiaUnited States\n37123interviewinterviewinterviewselected institutionsselected personsone institutionSoutheast AsiaNew ZealandGermany\n38123interviewinterview/observationquestionnaire/interviewselected personsone villageselected personsKoreaChinaGermany\n391234interviewinterview/questionnaireinterviewquestionnaire/interviewselected schools10 villages in 2 statesselected schools and persons in one cityselected schools in 2 countiesTaiwanIndiaIndiaThailand The Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in Japan: A Methodological Consideration 45\nthat requires observation in order to obtain results which cannot be gained through considerations \nof literature alone. The field creates an image which can neither be trivialized nor exaggerated. Ethnographic investigation centering on long-term participant observation in the field is often con -\nsidered antithetical to questionnaire survey. Of course, the former is only one survey method, as are intensive interviews, scholastic aptitude and psychological tests, the collection and scrutiny of literature as well as statistical data and other materials. The importance of ‘watching and listening’ cannot be denied, however the danger of having no choice but to devote one’s time to ‘watching \nand listening’ should not be forgotten. Ethnographic investigation is a proven method of recording observations of educational activity, which are very individualized.\nIn this respect, studies based on ‘participant observation’ that have been conducted by mem -\nbers of the Society should be open for discussion about whether researchers have indeed followed appropriate methodological rigors to justify this claim. After having analyzed the studies by our Society members, what can be said at present is that we will likely have to wait until more qual -\nity monographs and articles have been accumulated in order for this method to take root in our field. A distinctive methodology of fieldwork cannot be established until such individual studies accumulate and achievements which cannot be reduced to any existing discipline are established.\nIt is not always the case that the length of stay in any given fieldwork context translates as \n‘the longer the better.’ It is likely that short-term results from a novice researcher who is unfamil -\niar with the area concerned may not be as valuable as those of a specialist who has been commit -\nted to researching and living in an area for a long period of time. Three outstanding studies\n24 \nconducted by Society members are particularly noteworthy, in that they reflect dedication to the field and involve participant observation as a main research technique. These studies demonstrate an attempt to grasp the changes in a village or educational institution not with a shortsighted or hasty attitude but from a long-term perspective.\nThere has been much concern in recent years that our increasingly global, achievement- \noriented academic climate results in pressure to complete studies more quickly. In such circum -\nstances, an environment is being established in which long and enduring field surveys with close linkages to investigation target sites, as expressed by the phrase ‘one person in one village for one year’ in cultural anthropology, will be difficult to realize in our discipline in coming years. Hopefully this concern will prove unfounded.\nThird, regardless of whether a study is conducted on an individual or collaborative basis, \nhuman relations involved must be reexamined. Fieldwork performed by an individual researcher should be strongly encouraged when there appears to be a certain field or theme of study that an individual can pursue. Of course, a major premise of individual fieldwork is that what an individ -\nual can and should do must be performed alone. In this respect, it is sometimes seen that an indi -\nvidual who is involved in a country’s development in a professional capacity (hereafter referred as ‘development practitioner’) mobilizes local consultants and specialists to collect related data and information and utilizes results in creating a report. In order to quickly grasp the complicated social relations in an area and accurately reflect results in a publicized project, various know-how and techniques using mainly qualitative methods to complete an investigation in a short period of time must be worked out thoroughly in advance. However, ‘problem-finding type’ investigations often adopted by researchers deeply involved in a local area generally do not easily fit within the time -\nframe of development practitioners. Are not comparative education researchers engaged in a task similar to that of the practitioners? To rephrase this question, does the successful collection of data negate any need to question the process? Indeed, it would also appear necessary to consider the Otsuka ,Yutaka 46\ninternal changes and mental development of the researcher.\nThere are many circumstances in fieldwork whereby two or more researchers, including the \nresearcher of the area concerned, are necessarily involved. It is certain that an investigation con-\nducted by one person has an advantage in terms of simplicity and rapport with those surveyed with the provision that it is carried out well. While it is often said that ‘two heads are better than one,’ conducting fieldwork investigation on an individual basis can have considerable advantages over collective efforts. However, in terms of reliability and verifiability of survey results and falsifiabil-ity in reverse, a group investigation is more effective than an individual investigation.\nTo examine more concretely the relation between individual and group investigation, we \ncan consider the use of language. With respect to survey language, it is a minimum requirement for a person entering into the field to have a thorough knowledge of the language used in that field. It is inexcusable for a professional researcher who emphasizes fieldwork to intend to complete an investigation only in Japanese or English in an area where a third language is used in common discourse. However, to acquire sufficient proficiency in a foreign language to enable one to con -\nduct research in that language involves no small amount of time, energy and dedication. Moreover, it is very difficult, though not necessarily impossible, to take up a theme that is related to multi-language issues in an area consisting of multiple races and many languages, and to navigate lan -\nguages other than the national language or a dominant language. It is not rare that multiple linguistic interpretations intervene between the researcher and those surveyed. Investigation may furthermore be carried out in collaboration with a researcher of the area concerned who is not simply a linguis -\ntic translator. In such a case, it becomes key to the success or failure of a whole investigation whether long-lasting relationships can be built between researchers in the field concerned. Such researchers, would hold the consciousness of being ‘partners’ in the literal sense, rather than uti -\nlizing local ‘auxiliary persons’ in capacities such as translator.\nGenerally speaking, there are a host of potential sources of complications hindering suc -\ncessful engagement in fieldwork. With respect to cooperation with the local persons concerned, as a foreigner a Japanese comparative education researcher cannot always enjoy free choice in the selection of fieldwork locations and institutions in every country. There often exist barriers for which individual researchers can do nothing about, as experienced particularly in socialist coun-tries.\n25 Another frequent problem involves perceptions of success: If a researcher gains the impres -\nsion that his or her fieldwork in a foreign country has progressed smoothly, it is tempting to believe that the preliminary target level may have been too low, or that some unforeseeable force was at work behind the scenes. What we can do is to use our brains to get the most out of given condi -\ntions. Collaboration between Japanese comparative education researchers and those in the field concerned is indispensable from this viewpoint. It can be stated with conviction that first of all, good human relationships built up over a long period of time determine the success or failure of much fieldwork.\n4 The Field as ‘Method’\nFor the purpose of promoting active research in comparative education by Japanese schol -\nars, Toru Umakoshi pointed out that more ‘area studies’ should first of all be conducted. He also \nproposed a concrete path (a reciprocating movement of ‘area studies’ and ‘theorization’) towards correcting existing theories rooted in each discipline.\n26 When we confront various educational phe - The Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in Japan: A Methodological Consideration 47\nnomena seen in each field by using existing disciplines and theories, we must recognize that most \nof these disciplines and theories have been created in the West. Edward Said’s assertion that “Orientalism [is] a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient”\n27 is in fact a reflection of Western ethnocentrism. His view is nevertheless extremely impor -\ntant for studies which consider non-Western areas as the field within comparative education research. Furthermore, Japanese scholars receive the benefit of using existing disciplines and theories as research tools in the process of academic training, regardless of whether we have internalized or merely superficially accepted them. Therefore, the suggestion by Yasushi Maehira that ‘reverse eth-nocentrism’\n28 medially-located among Japanese scholars should be regarded is an important \nconcept.\nThere has been numerous debate over the years as to whether or not area studies can be \nconsidered an independent discipline by itself. It is not my wish here to side definitely in favor of one view or the other. However whether we should place more emphasis on the ‘field’ or on ‘exist -\ning theories’ does seem to present a profound issue. What any approach must reflect is the under -\nstanding of the field not as a place for ‘sample’ extraction in order to verify or refute existing theories. This trivialized way of thinking will not lead to the development of an original theory peculiar to the field that begins with some holistic perception. This author believes that it is time to discard any attachment to the weak eclecticism of all-encompassing approaches, to dare to turn down the ambiguity of exploring the modifiability of the existing theories, just to thoroughly per -\nceive what the field suggests without interposing any preconception. This viewpoint is also related to differences in whether the same ‘study on Thai education’, for example, can be viewed as a branch of ‘Thai study’, or as a branch of ‘education study’. The “field” itself expresses totality, and it involves something completely different from segmentalized themes such as ‘basic educa -\ntion curriculum of country A,’ and ‘decentralization of the educational administration of country B’. Therefore, let us suppose that a specified theme is apparently dealt with in several studies; the boundary line which speaks to the genuine value of those studies is whether the theme is selected independently by chance, or is based on full consideration and discernment backed by overall deep understanding of the field accumulated over a long period of time.\nRegarding the unit of analysis or investigation target, as shown in Table III, a variety of \nunits are analyzed in field-based studies, from cross-national perspectives of eight countries, to one specific classroom and even to an individual scholar\n29. There seems to be a general tendency in \nfieldwork where researchers focus on small unit such as a village or a school. In any case, in com -\nparison with researchers who do not enter the field, those who do are distanced from their own culture, and much more frequently encounter situations where they cannot avoid reviewing their own cultures more objectively. Criticism that there is “no comparison”\n30 in research results by \nJCES members often proves justified and must be accepted with sincerity. Nevertheless, the researcher who is deeply committed to the field is always personally engaged in ‘comparison,’ and is continuously pressed to make value judgments from a comparative viewpoint in the process of investigation and reporting.\nThis is the meaning of ‘the field as method,’ which helps to contribute to character- \nbuilding on the part of the researcher. In such daily, repeated ‘comparison,’ it is ideal for Japanese researchers not only to put a pivoting foot of comparison on our own cultural setting, but hope -\nfully to seek out more perspectives and consider things from different angles. It is not sufficient only to consider various phenomena occurring in the field with the inborn views and ways of think -\ning as Japanese. Junzo Kawada called this concept ‘triangulation’\n31; Kazuko Tsurumi showed the Otsuka ,Yutaka 48\nsame recognition in her works on Pearl Buck and John Dewey.32 It is possible to consider more \nobjectively and essentially the phenomenon seen in the field not by a simple comparison between \ntwo things, but by adding more perspectives and analyzing within a somewhat more complicated framework. On this point, Chie Nakane once pointed out the importance of having interest and practical knowledge in more than two research areas, such as ‘major’ and ‘minor’ fields. She stated that those geographical areas should be somewhere other than within the society in which the researcher was born and raised, reasoning that “if we choose the area in which we were born and raised, our observation will be inevitably less rigorous in method.”\n33 In general, in acquiring knowl-\nedge of a certain field, if we cling only to the field, we may not be able to have a very broad and deep understanding of it. However, unfortunately we can find few works in the JCES Journal that were written from a triangulated or multifaceted standpoint.\nThus, although the field may be is likened to ‘a treasure mountain’, neither is the mountain \neasily climbed nor can the treasures be found merely lying around. Even if physical and objective conditions are all provided for, not everyone is necessarily able to capitalize upon them. Only those standing in the field who have “a direct sensitivity to the material before them, and then a contin -\nual self-examination of their methodology and practice, a constant attempt to keep their work responsive to the material and not to a doctrinal preconception”,\n34 are successful in finding their \ntreasures. Ultimately, the ideal fieldwork technique can be created only by researchers who con -\ntinuously refine themselves in the field. In this way, an original theory, not to mention a new dis -\ncipline, will be produced through persistent and close dialog with data and information35 obtained \nand accumulated in the field; ‘an original theory’ in this case includes not only drawing conclu -\nsions from case studies, but also typifying the results obtained from two or more case studies and further interrelating them on a more advanced, abstract level. Some kind of ‘synthesis’ process is required, and eventually an achievement that is non-reducible to any existing discipline should be the end result. There is little value in studies on a foreign country or comparative studies which merely reuse and rearrange original research results.\nAnother point to be considered regarding fieldwork, as indicated in the title of the present \npaper, is the field as an educational material or learning resource; i.e., a survey in certain field adopted as part of course work for students majoring in comparative education. In some Japanese universities\n36 the requirement of overseas fieldwork has been already adopted as part of the curric-\nulum. The crucial problem of such overseas fieldwork, as I have discussed in detail elsewhere37, \ninclude the scarcity of student involvement in the planning stages and the possibility that research will devolve into a ‘quasi-survey’. As already stated, when the composition of fieldwork is con-sidered, the success or failure of the whole study depends on precedent survey design or selection of sites, institutions, informants or interviewees. Therefore, survey design should be completed prior to actually doing observation and data collection in the field, which forms the middle phase of the survey (the final stage being reporting). In overseas fieldwork for the training of students, the extent to which students take part in this important process is, regretfully, extremely limited or almost nil.\n5 Conclusion\nMore and more fieldwork-based studies have been appearing in the JCES journal with each \nnew edition. The initial 10 volumes since its inauguration contain 10 articles based on fieldwork The Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in Japan: A Methodological Consideration 49\nand the next 10 volumes contain 9 articles. In the third decade, 29 articles based on fieldwork \nappeared, and 38 articles within the latest 5 years (owing largely to the decision in 2006 to pub -\nlish two editions per year). Not only has the rate of increase been accelerated, but also the quality of the fieldwork seems to have been improving gradually. Countries and areas to be the object of investigation have been diversifying. Focusing on the most recent 9 volumes (Nos. 31–39), only 3 out of 38 articles depend solely on questionnaire survey which had been the typical technique used in fieldwork in previous years. Five articles utilize observation, although the length of time in the field varies from article to article. The remaining 31articles utilize the interview method, of which 6 articles are based on composite methods of interview and questionnaire or observation. A partic -\nularly noteworthy phenomenon is that studies centering on Western advanced countries are also adopting fieldwork as their research method. The younger generations involved with those coun -\ntries are trying to positively form their own data and information, as was the case for studies on developing countries, instead of ‘borrowing’ or ‘consuming’ ready-made research results. These recent academic trends may indicate that studies in comparative education in Japan are finally com-ing into their own: what was long considered a ‘peripheral’ or ‘consumer’ position in academia is now being replaced with true hope for making original and active contributions to research in the field.\n38\nAcknowledgement\nI am greatly indebted to Dr. Arthur Meerman, Associate Professor of Kurume University \nfor all his helpful comments. However, all shortcomings and errors are my own.\nNotes\n 1 Typical works on Fieldwork are as follows; Leonard Schatzman and Anselm Strauss, Field Research: Strategies for \nNatural Sociology , Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973. Roger Sanjek ed., Fieldnotes: A Making of \nAnthropology , Ithaca, N.Y .: Cornel University Press, 1990. Ikuya Sato, Fieldwork , Tokyo: Shinyosha, 1992. Robert \nEmerson, Rachel Frez and Linda Shaw, Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. \nJohn Lofland and Lyn Lofland, Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis , Belmont: \nWadsworth Publishing Company, 1995.\n 2 1,003 members belong to JCES as of June 2009 and it is one of the largest educational societies except for the Japanese Educational Research Association, the comprehensive learned society of education in this country.\n 3 The Society organized four preparatory annual conferences prior to its formal inauguration in 1965. Since this time, the name and style of the Society’s journal has changed a few times; i.e., Hikaku Kyoiku Gakkai Kiyo (Bulletin of \nthe Japan Comparative Education Society) of the inaugural issue in 1975, Hikaku Kyoikugaku (Comparative Education) \nof No. 14 in 1988, and Hikaku Kyoikugaku Kenkyu (Studies in Comparative Education) in 1990. It was published \nonce a year from its inauguration until the 2005 issue, following which the Society decided to publish the journal twice a year from No. 32 in 2006. Thirty nine issues have been published as of 2009. In this article, Bulletin of JCES \nis used in the references as representing these three different names.\n 4 Tsuneo Ayabe, “Methodological Problems in Comparative Education in Japan: Anthropological approach” Bulletin of \nJCES, No.1, 1975, p.27. [in Japanese]\n 5 Loc. cit.\n 6 Masaharu Amano, “The Area Study in the Field of Comparative Education in Japan; The Example of Studying German Education ” Bulletin of JCES, No.1, 1975, p.39. [in Japanese]\n 7 Michiya Shimbori, “Methodological Problems in Comparative Education in Japan: Sociological approach”, Bulletin \nof JCES, No.1, 1975, p.18. [in Japanese]\n 8 Loc. cit.\n 9 Minoru Ishizuki, “Role of Comparative and International Education in Educational Research” Bulletin of JCES, \nNo.25, 1999, p.19. [in Japanese]\n10 Ibid. p.20. [in Japanese] Otsuka ,Yutaka 50\n11 Shinichi Suzuki, “Problems and Future Perspectives of Comparative Education Societies”, ibid, p.42. [in Japanese]\n12 Akira Ninomiya, “Research Infrastructure of Comparative Education”, ibid, pp.47–48. [in Japanese]\n13 Takeshi Sasamori, “Comparative Education and Area Studies (2): The case of Oceania”, Ibid, p.66. [in Japanese]\n14 Yokuo Murata and Megumi Shibuya, “Comparative Education and Area Studies; The case of Southeast Asian coun -\ntries” Bulletin of JCES, No. 25, 1999, p.58. [in Japanese]\n15 Ibid. The result of present author’s analysis shown in Table III is slightly different from Murata and Shibuya’s. These \nauthors mentioned numbers of articles in question but did not specify detailed contents.\n16 Among the published articles, memorial addresses for the deceased, annotated bibliography, moderators’ brief sum -\nmaries of symposium, special sessions and roundtables are excluded from analysis.\n17 Shunichi Nishimura, “Problems of Comprehensive Schools in Southeast Asia” Bulletin of JCES, No.3, 1977, p.74. [in \nJapanese]\n18 Taneo Harada, “General View”, Bulletin of JCES, No.3, 1977, p.1. [in Japanese]\n19 The remaining article concerns eight countries, including the United States and others in Europe, Oceania and Asia \n(Yoshiyuki Nagata, “An International Comparative Study of Alternative Schools and Educational Administration”, Bulletin of JCES, No.31, 2005, po.156–176. [in Japanese]).\n20 Masahiro Tejima, “The Introduction of Islamic Values into Environmental Education in Malaysia”, Bulletin of JCES , \nNo.25, 1999, po.116–134. [in Japanese]\n21 Hirotaka Nanbu, “The Process of Preparing Higher Education Faculty in China”, Ibid. pp.135–150. [in Japanese]\n22 Koro Suzuki, “Islamic Education in Public Primary and Secondary Schools in Southern Thailand”, Ibid. pp.97–115. \n[in Japanese]\n23 Considering the case of China, the present author’s research area, the situation existed until approximately 15 years ago whereby sources of obtainable information were limited to general newspapers and magazines such as the People’ s \nDaily, Guangming Daily, the Red Flag, as well as a limited number of education-related books and magazines. \nNowadays, although the objectivity and validity of reporting may remain questionable, voluminous books and maga -\nzines exclusively on educational-related topics are being published in China. No longer are visits to the Ministry of Education in Beijing necessary to obtain the most basic data such as school or enrolled student numbers.\n24 In fact, there are studies which deserve close attention among those utilizing ethnographic methods by our members. Mina Hattori’s article based on participant observation and interviews during her two-and-a-half year stay in Diniyyah Puteri, a women’s Islamic school in Padang Panjang of West Sumatra, was bestowed the Hiratsuka Award which was established in 1990 to commemorate the first president of JCES, Dr. Masunori Hiratsuka, as well as to encourage and reward young scholars’ research achievement. Takashi Nozu has entered Yasothon County in northeastern Thailand intermittently since 1996 and continues to observe school culture. Another example is the study by Shigeo Nishimura, which compared and contrasted the changes in education in Nappon, a small village in north Sumatra, from the early 1970s to the present.\n25 Taking China as an example, even if the desired site of fieldwork has been decided upon, it is impossible to unilater -\nally specify the area below the county (xian) level according to investigation design.\n26 Toru Umakoshi, Hikaku Kyouikugaku (Comparative Education), Tokyo: Toshindo, 2007, p.59. He seemed to use the \nterm ‘area studies’ not as a discipline but as a synonym for ‘fieldwork’.\n27 Edward W. Said, Orientalism, New York: Pantheon Books, 1978, p.3.\n28 Yasushi Maehira, “Interpretation” in Le Thanh Khoi, Comparative Education (translated by Y . Maehira et. al.), Kyoto: \nKorosha, 1991, p.421. [in Japanese]\n29 The article in question analyzes the changes that happened after the unification of two Germanies through the life-history of an educator, Dr. Wendelin Szalai of former East Germany (Emi Kinoshita, “Tenkanki no Rekishi Kyoiku to Yoriyoi Shakai no Kikyu (History Education in Times of Social Changes and the Desire to Build a Better Society)”, Bulletin of JCES, No.34, 2007, pp.3–19. [in Japanese]\n30 Shogo Ichikawa, “Hikaku Kyoikugaku Saiko” (Reconsidering the Comparative Education) , Bulletin of JCES, No.16, \n1990, pp.5–17. [in Japanese]\n31 Mineo Nakajima and Chalmers Johnson eds. Chiiki Kenkyu no Genzai (Area Studies and the Social Sciences) Tokyo: \nTaishukan Shoten, 1989, p.170. [in Japanese]\n32 Kazuko Tsurumi, “Pearl Buck wo naze kakuka (Why I write about Pearl Buck)” and “Dewey to Nippon (Dewey and Japan)”Collection: Tsurumi Kazuko Mandara (Collection of Kazuko Tsurumi’s Works like Mandela), Tokyo: Fujiwara Shoten, 1997, pp.129–149 and pp.103–119. [in Japanese]\n33 Mineo Nakajima and Chalmers Johnson eds. Ibid, p.311. [in Japanese]\n34 Edward W. Said, Orientalism, New York: Pantheon Books, 1978, p.327.\n35 As for the process of making continuous interaction with data and information and generating a theory, Glaser and Strauss’s book (Barney G. Glaser and Anselm L. Strauss, Discovery of Grounded Theory: strategies for qualitative \nresearch, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1968) is suggestive.\n36 For example, the Faculties of Education at the University of Tsukuba and at Nagoya University, as well as the Graduate School of International Development of Nagoya University have been actively implementing overseas field - The Challenges of Fieldwork in Comparative Education Studies in Japan: A Methodological Consideration 51\nwork for students.\n37 Yutaka Otsuka, “Kaigai Jicchi Kenshu no Mokuhyou Settei to Kokateki Jisshi Hoho nitsuite” (Overseas Fieldwork \nand its Effective Pracitices) Hiroshi Osada ed. Kokusai Kaihatsu Kyoryoku Jinzai Ikusei no tameno Kaigai Jicchi \nKenshu Shuho no Kaihatsu (Development of A Method of Overseas Fieldwork to Train the Manpower of International Development and Cooperation) Graduate School of International Development, Nagoya University, 2004, pp.1–14. [in Japanese]\n38 Altbach defined the Third world countries and their universities as ‘periphery’ and ‘consumers of knowledge’, thereby contrasting the ‘centers’ and ‘producers’ in the industrialized countries (Philip G. Altbach, “The Universities as Center and Periphery” translated in as Chapter 2 in Toru Umakoshi ed. Hikaku Koto Kyoikuron (Comparative Higher \nEducation), Tokyo: Tamagawa University Press, 1994, pp.106–135." }

[ -0.09242607653141022, -0.015685269609093666, 0.0510086789727211, 0.019307101145386696, 0.025228600949048996, -0.08219052106142044, -0.004363726358860731, 0.026440827175974846, -0.16607894003391266, 0.03913844749331474, -0.06834763288497925, -0.09191221743822098, 0.02242191880941391, -0.0123009467497468, -0.04465490207076073, -0.008961321786046028, 0.026219172403216362, -0.046690940856933594, 0.016248418018221855, -0.05654597282409668, 0.005112217273563147, 0.06669522821903229, -0.03532979264855385, -0.02655680663883686, -0.032287221401929855, 0.06241777539253235, -0.13459350168704987, 0.029875367879867554, 0.0078023336827754974, -0.01739872805774212, -0.05055970698595047, 0.10551232844591141, -0.08303846418857574, -0.11589884757995605, 0.00041606862214393914, 0.09198392927646637, -0.03382064402103424, 0.028634972870349884, -0.03611909598112106, 0.018489791080355644, 0.01012797188013792, 0.00001533856993773952, 0.060544878244400024, -0.04647234082221985, -0.1056956946849823, -0.005378708243370056, -0.012500489130616188, -0.07888378202915192, 0.012790019623935223, 0.02492540515959263, 0.06122925877571106, -0.005566978827118874, -0.040960125625133514, -0.007309340871870518, -0.0897144228219986, -0.006575369741767645, -0.02438652142882347, -0.024918336421251297, -0.06668584793806076, -0.018435493111610413, -0.007103790529072285, 0.0002701007470022887, -0.11893504858016968, 0.04108327254652977, 0.06438290327787399, 0.03427444025874138, -0.04008213430643082, 0.018611285835504532, -0.0012420041020959616, -0.06119542941451073, -0.024360863491892815, 0.021895350888371468, 0.004972581751644611, -0.09146280586719513, -0.025286592543125153, 0.03732093423604965, 0.13577775657176971, -0.000850708456709981, 0.03619081526994705, -0.021583346650004387, -0.05276580899953842, 0.00913902185857296, 0.15136197209358215, -0.07212281972169876, -0.07083704322576523, 0.05100876837968826, 0.02014509215950966, 0.01645532250404358, 0.03148473799228668, -0.018487418070435524, 0.07471022009849548, 0.06867974996566772, -0.007519560866057873, -0.026739854365587234, -0.029257945716381073, 0.11399214714765549, -0.03370441868901253, 0.009086379781365395, -0.01897101290524006, -0.0044104717671871185, -0.014638228341937065, -0.03009086102247238, -0.04387689754366875, -0.048321086913347244, 0.060952309519052505, 0.058072563260793686, -0.014453811571002007, 0.08117242157459259, 0.011027084663510323, 0.0005677291774190962, -0.043702755123376846, 0.07723546028137207, 0.0416201576590538, 0.008952879346907139, 0.04128632694482803, 0.006211747881025076, -0.01677427440881729, -0.019662439823150635, 0.0021066342014819384, -0.10829651355743408, -0.03796054422855377, -0.000928653811570257, 0.019748087972402573, -0.002854679012671113, 0.09562646597623825, 0.031024357303977013, 0.06721118092536926, -1.5855168822936788e-33, 0.03576499968767166, -0.024102933704853058, -0.0160817913711071, -0.07735369354486465, 0.006623709108680487, -0.03657710924744606, 0.00426303269341588, -0.04803893715143204, -0.0018011064967140555, 0.05091938376426697, 0.03257082775235176, -0.04539007693529129, -0.060140471905469894, 0.021897710859775543, -0.05542733520269394, -0.01461170893162489, -0.018110886216163635, -0.02708101086318493, -0.04875088855624199, -0.023177124559879303, -0.08232157677412033, 0.013482540845870972, -0.05692161247134209, 0.01003342680633068, 0.019549012184143066, 0.020742997527122498, 0.049269746989011765, 0.03726702928543091, -0.08347019553184509, 0.005948865786194801, 0.053461942821741104, -0.06557667255401611, 0.009049326181411743, 0.04202140495181084, 0.07603346556425095, -0.013201122172176838, -0.00207152240909636, 0.024730995297431946, 0.023919235914945602, -0.00010832415136974305, 0.08676652610301971, 0.028375133872032166, 0.05139167979359627, 0.051873691380023956, 0.013450300320982933, -0.05265680328011513, 0.04655411094427109, 0.0748068317770958, 0.00781184621155262, 0.022559581324458122, -0.005298952106386423, 0.07755107432603836, 0.008306542411446571, 0.03505857661366463, -0.07537519931793213, 0.031806137412786484, -0.011363117955625057, -0.04822898656129837, 0.015877576544880867, 0.03775632753968239, -0.027813972905278206, 0.04398065060377121, 0.0027516621630638838, -0.04356531798839569, 0.04625065252184868, 0.009525679051876068, -0.005722497124224901, 0.025428099557757378, 0.03767990693449974, -0.05493418127298355, -0.019734535366296768, -0.03364239260554314, 0.06697402894496918, 0.06302312016487122, 0.04858914762735367, 0.017911404371261597, 0.06625113636255264, -0.004953356459736824, 0.07902436703443527, 0.03063305653631687, -0.06361691653728485, -0.01341171283274889, -0.0010511056752875447, -0.0033875617664307356, -0.025120744481682777, -0.09337484836578369, 0.06021127477288246, -0.06334807723760605, -0.0068208579905331135, -0.02162945829331875, 0.01979423686861992, 0.01844901591539383, 0.02524050883948803, -0.006757678464055061, 0.027549097314476967, 7.0206524080780935e-34, 0.05583811178803444, 0.05066513642668724, -0.002800511196255684, 0.011923867277801037, -0.014305741526186466, -0.13337533175945282, 0.11829600483179092, -0.024563690647482872, 0.09057700634002686, -0.03657464683055878, 0.041414737701416016, 0.0769370049238205, -0.02600492164492607, -0.06524014472961426, 0.03328142687678337, -0.028543276712298393, 0.00828529428690672, -0.0063665867783129215, -0.018208367750048637, -0.10720442980527878, -0.004687592852860689, -0.019250743091106415, -0.011441260576248169, 0.0024619484320282936, -0.023354321718215942, 0.018150487914681435, -0.03677716851234436, -0.07768667489290237, 0.012256031855940819, 0.00781337171792984, -0.03695279359817505, 0.022548619657754898, 0.0832265317440033, 0.005777575075626373, -0.0038909935392439365, -0.052170511335134506, 0.11290079355239868, -0.035288918763399124, -0.031288474798202515, -0.013830038718879223, 0.09852056950330734, -0.020308639854192734, 0.06942163407802582, 0.029022125527262688, 0.0242877546697855, 0.09769196808338165, -0.04549825191497803, 0.024229735136032104, -0.005377745721489191, 0.11091869324445724, 0.0570213720202446, 0.08426926285028458, 0.006716699339449406, 0.007272227667272091, 0.004670518450438976, -0.014505320228636265, 0.08922027796506882, 0.026456013321876526, -0.0908351019024849, -0.011148947291076183, 0.03311440721154213, 0.06920962780714035, -0.024593356996774673, 0.04805339127779007, 0.06445923447608948, 0.026412392035126686, -0.024307698011398315, -0.059460464864969254, -0.034319762140512466, 0.025740956887602806, -0.04428417608141899, -0.04628561809659004, 0.028253279626369476, -0.1582677960395813, 0.07190029323101044, -0.05492902919650078, -0.008956024423241615, -0.014348690398037434, 0.019161708652973175, 0.021140875294804573, 0.007803701795637608, 0.10012422502040863, 0.0025512329302728176, 0.06917990744113922, 0.05893108248710632, -0.023257585242390633, -0.01413163635879755, -0.0825347825884819, 0.052206914871931076, 0.011932325549423695, -0.05221870541572571, -0.053684767335653305, -0.08037112653255463, 0.07930490374565125, -0.013829370029270649, -4.124303387698092e-8, 0.043255243450403214, 0.03997384011745453, -0.07222022116184235, 0.019375275820493698, 0.028861235827207565, 0.02333373762667179, -0.023454228416085243, 0.05117827281355858, 0.0009005048777908087, 0.056929342448711395, -0.0021546129137277603, 0.08413558453321457, -0.04667392373085022, -0.009538250043988228, 0.025911426171660423, -0.10281959176063538, -0.004182339645922184, -0.1202295795083046, -0.057608284056186676, -0.11558657139539719, 0.0031995712779462337, -0.017553851008415222, 0.007071918807923794, 0.01897306554019451, -0.029600486159324646, 0.022477077320218086, 0.07702679932117462, 0.04951205104589462, 0.03676183894276619, 0.021538598462939262, -0.019390951842069626, 0.052191153168678284, -0.03478056192398071, 0.0228311475366354, 0.13881193101406097, -0.02707865834236145, -0.03974283114075661, 0.08555831760168076, 0.015916142612695694, 0.03366115689277649, -0.07859945297241211, 0.08175117522478104, 0.010712931863963604, 0.022245163097977638, 0.05535665899515152, 0.0027792146429419518, -0.07641147822141647, 0.06858747452497482, 0.10510927438735962, -0.05036395788192749, -0.007177179679274559, 0.002379306126385927, -0.017837028950452805, 0.011883145198225975, 0.02036884054541588, 0.02434750460088253, -0.013240613974630833, -0.0511789508163929, -0.025611290708184242, 0.0015107978833839297, 0.014419426210224628, -0.04556025564670563, -0.017793184146285057, -0.05722658336162567 ]

{ "pdf_file": "HLU6GY5HJLJF4AYSMOXUB6K324KXZBZM.pdf", "text": "Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-1 APPENDIX G \nSTREAM TEMPERATURE ASSESSMENT FOR PETERSON CREEK UPPER \nCLARK FORK TMDL PLANNING AREA \n \nPrepared for: Deer Lodge Valley C onservation District \n1 Hollenback Road Deer Lodge, MT 59722 and Montana Department of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 200901 Helena, MT 59620-0901 Prepared by: PBS&J 801 N. Last Chance Gulch, Suite 101 Helena, Montana 59601-3360 \n \nOctober 2008 Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-2 Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-3 TABLE OF CONTENTS \n \nSection 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 5 \n1.1 Montana Water Quality Standards ........................................................................................ 5 \nSection 2.0 Temperature Assessment ............................................................................................ 7 \n2.1 Field Data collection ............................................................................................................. 7 \n2.1.1 Temperature Measurements ........................................................................................... 7 \n2.1.2 Streamflow Measurements ............................................................................................. 7 \n2.1.3 Riparian Shading ............................................................................................................ 7 \n2.2 QUAL2K Model ................................................................................................................... 8 \n2.2.1 Data Sources and Model Assumptions .......................................................................... 8 \n2.2.2 Baseline Scenario ......................................................................................................... 15 \n2.2.3 Shade Scenario ............................................................................................................. 16 \n2.2.4 Channel Morphology Scenario .................................................................................... 18 \n2.2.5 Water Consumptive Use Scenario ............................................................................... 18 \n2.2.6 Natural Condition Scenario .......................................................................................... 19 \n2.2.7 Naturally Occurring Scenario (ARM 17.30.602) ........................................................ 20 \n2.3 Peterson Creek Modeled Temperature Relative to Montana Standards ............................. 21 \nSection 3.0 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 23 \nSection 4.0 References ................................................................................................................. 25 \nAttachment A 2007 Temperature Data Summar y Upper Clark Fork TMDL Planning Area ....... 27 \nAttachment B Streamflow Data U pper Clark Fork TMDL Planning Area .................................. 29 \nAttachment C Solar Pathfinder Data Upper Clark Fork TMDL Planning Area ........................... 31 \nAttachment D QUAL2K Model Scenarios Upper Clark Fork TMDL Planning Area ................. 33 \n \nLIST OF TABLES \nTable 2-1. Temperature Data Logger and Streamflow Measurement Sites. ................................... 9 \nTable 2-2. Solar Pathfinder Sites. ................................................................................................... 9 \nTable 2-3. Peterson Creek Temperature (PCT) Reach Descriptions. ........................................... 10 \nTable 2-4. Solar Pathfinder Sh ade Data Applied in QUAL2K. .................................................... 13 \nTable 2-5. Hydrologic Balance for Peterson Creek. ..................................................................... 14 \nTable 2-6. Peterson Creek Temperatures Relative to Montana’s Water Quality Standards. ....... 22 \n \nLIST OF FIGURES \nFigure 2-1. Peterson Creek Monitoring Sites and Reaches. ........................................................ 12 \nFigure 2-2. QUAL2K Baseline (E xisting Conditions) Scenario. ................................................. 15 \nFigure 2-3. QUAL2K Shade Scenario 1. ...................................................................................... 17 \nFigure 2-4. QUAL2K Shade Scenario 2. ...................................................................................... 18 \nFigure 2-5. QUAL2K Water Consumptive Use Scenario. ........................................................... 19 \nFigure 2-6. QUAL2K Natural Condition Scenario. ...................................................................... 20 \nFigure 2-7. QUAL2K Naturally Occurring Scenario. .................................................................. 21 \n \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-4 Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-5 SECTION 1.0 \nINTRODUCTION \n \nTemperature impairments were assessed within Peterson Creek using a combination of in-stream \ntemperature measurements, riparian shadi ng assessments, mid-summer streamflow \nmeasurements, and modeling. The Peterson Creek temperature assessment was conducted to aid in the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) in the Upper Clark Fork TMDL Planning Area (TPA). Data collected during th is assessment were used in the QUAL2K model \nto assess the influence of shading and streamfl ow on stream temperatures in Peterson Creek. \nThe results of this assessment were compar ed to Montana’s wate r quality standards for \ntemperature to evaluate bene ficial use support and potenti al restoration strategies. \n \n1.1 Montana Water Quality Standards \n Montana’s water quality standard for temperat ure addresses a maximum allowable increase \nabove the “naturally occurring” te mperature to protect the existi ng thermal regime for fish and \naquatic life. For waters classified as B-1, th e maximum allowable increase over the naturally \noccurring temperature (if the natu rally occurring temperature is less than 66º Fahrenheit) is 1 °F. \nIn the naturally occurrin g range of 66-66.5 ºF, an increase cannot exceed 67ºF. If the naturally \noccurring temperature is greater than 66.5ºF, the maximum allo wable increase is 0.5º F [ARM \n17.30.622(e) and ARM 17.30.623(e)]. Temperature monitoring and modeling indicated that naturally occurring stream temper atures in Peterson Creek are likely greater than 66.5°F during \nportions of the summer months. Thus, the maximum allowable increase due to unmitigated \nhuman causes is 0.5°F (0.23°C). Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-6 Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-7 SECTION 2.0 \nTEMPERATURE ASSESSMENT \n \nThe Peterson Creek temperature assessment was performed in order to identify existing conditions and to determine if anthropogenic disturbances have led to increased stream water \ntemperatures. This assessment utilized field data and computer modeling to assess stream temperatures in relation to Mont ana’s water quality standards. \n \n2.1 Field Data collection \n Field data used in this assessment were coll ected by Montana DEQ staff during the 2007 field \nseason and included temperature measurements, st reamflow measurements, and an assessment of \nriparian shading along Peterson Creek and selected tributaries. Field methods are described in \nUpper Clark Fork TMDL Planning Area Temperature and Instantaneous Flow Monitoring \nSampling and Analysis Plan (MDEQ 2007). \n \n2.1.1 Temperature Measurements \n Temperature monitoring was conducted on Peterson Creek over a two-month timeframe in the summer of 2007. The study timeframe examined stream temperatures during the period when \nstreamflows tend to be lowest, wa ter temperatures are warmest, and negative affects to the cold \nwater fishery and aquatic life beneficial us es are likely most pronounced. Temperature \nmonitoring consisted of placing temperature data logging devices at 11 sites in the Peterson \nCreek watershed during the summer of 2007. Temp erature monitoring sites were selected to \nbracket stream reaches with similar hydrology, riparian vegetation type, valley type, stream \naspect, and channel width so that the temperatur e data collected during this assessment could be \nutilized in the QUAL2K model. A summary of temperature data is presented in Attachment A . \n \n2.1.2 Streamflow Measurements \n Streamflow was measured at 11 sites on Peterson Creek and selected tr ibutary streams where \ntemperature data logging devi ces were deployed. Streamflow data were collected during \ntemperature data logger deployment and again du ring retrieval. Streamflow data collected \nduring this assessment were used in the QUAL 2K model to help determine if in-stream \ntemperatures exceed Montana standards. Streamflow data is presented in Attachment B . \n \n2.1.3 Riparian Shading \n Riparian shading was assessed at five sites along Peterson Creek using a Solar Pathfinder which \nmeasures the amount of shade at a site in one-hou r intervals. The Solar Pathfinder was utilized \nto assess riparian shading using the August te mplate for the path of the sun. Shade was \nmeasured three times over a 200-foot reach at eac h site. In addition to the Solar Pathfinder \nreadings, the following measurements were performed at each site in which riparian shading was assessed: \n• Stream azimuth Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-8 • Bankfull width \n• Wetted width \n• Dominant tree species \n \nRiparian shading data were used to assess ex isting and potential riparian shading conditions \nrelative to the level of anthropogenic disturbance at a site . Measurements obtained with the \nSolar Pathfinder were utilized in the QUAL2K model to help determine if in-stream \ntemperatures exceed Montana standards. Solar Pathfinder data are presented in Attachment C . \n \n2.2 QUAL2K Model \n The QUAL2K model was used to determine if hum an caused disturbances within the watershed \nhave increased the water temperature above the “n aturally occurring” level and, if so, to what \ndegree. The QUAL2K model is available at: http://www.epa.gov/ATHENS/wwqtsc/html/qual2k.html . Stream temperature, riparian shading \nand streamflow data collected in the summer of 2007 were used to calibrate the QUAL2K model \nfor existing conditions. The poten tial to reduce stream temperatures was then modeled based on \nfive scenarios, including: \n• Baseline scenario (existing conditions) \n• Increased shade scenario \n• Decreased water consumptive use scenario \n• Natural condition scenario ( no anthropogenic impacts) \n• Naturally occurring scenario (full application of BMPs to present uses) \n \n2.2.1 Data Sources and Model Assumptions \n Data sources and model assumptions ma de during this assessment include: \n \n1. Temperature data loggers were placed at 11 sites in the Peterson Creek watershed during \nthe summer of 2007, including eight mainstem locations and three tributaries. Data loggers were deployed between July 16\nth and 18th and retrieved on September 26th. One \nmainstem temperature data logger was lost (PTR-04) and one tributary data logger did \nnot work properly (PTR-02) resulting in temp erature data for seven Peterson Creek sites \nand two tributary streams ( Table 2-1 ). The maximum daily temperature and the 7-day \naverage maximum temperature data were reviewed to identify the warmest day of the season. Maximum daily temperatures occurred between July 19\nth and 28th, depending on \nthe site, while the 7-day average maximu m temperature occurred between July 20th and \n22nd (Attachment A ). Based on this data set, th e QUAL2K model was run for July 21st, \n2007 conditions. \n 2. Streamflow data were collected at 11 site s during temperature da ta logger deployment \nand retrieval, with eight measurements on Peterson Creek and three measurements on \ntributary streams ( Table 2-1, Attachment B ). Streamflows collected during data logger \ndeployment were applied in the QUAL2K m odel since the deployment date (July 16\nth – \n18th) was near the date for which maximum temperatures were modeled (July 21st). Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-9 Depth and velocity measurements at each streamflow measurement site were used to \ndevelop a rating curve for us e in the QUAL2K model. Th e upper site (PTR-01) was \nexcluded when developing the rating curve fo r depth since this flow measurement was \nmuch lower than all the other measurements. \n \nTable 2-1. Temperature Data Logger and Streamflow Measurement Sites. \nTemperature Data Logger Site Stream Deployment Flow \n(cfs) \nPTR-01 Peterson Creek 0.1 \nPTR-02 Tributary 1, data invalid 0.6 \nPTR-03 Peterson Creek 1.6 \nPTR-04 Peterson Creek, data logger lost 1.7 \nPTR-05 Jack Creek 0.6 \nPTR-07 Peterson Creek 1.7 \nPTR-08 (no data logger) Peterson Creek 2.0 \nPTR-09 Peterson Creek N/A \nPTR-11 Burnt Hollow Creek 0.1 \nPTR-12 Peterson Creek 2.1 \nPTR-13 Peterson Creek 0.6 \nPTR-14 Peterson Creek 0.4 \n 3. Streamside shading was assessed at five sites corresponding to the location of \ntemperature data loggers. F our sites were located on Peters on Creek, while one site was \nlocated on a headwater tributar y stream. Riparian shade was assessed using the August \ntemplate for the solar pathfinder, which measures the amount of shade at one-hour intervals. Since the QUAL2K model was run for July 21\nst, shade measurements based on \nthe August path of the sun may be slightly higher than the actual shade on July 21st due to \nthe fact that sun is slightly lower in the sky during August than during July. However, \nbased on the relatively small size of the ripa rian shade dataset, any additional error \nintroduced based on slightly different sun angles in July and August is likely negligible. \nAt each site where shade was assessed, the ri parian vegetation type was also described \nand the average daily shade at each site was calculated ( Table 2-2 ). Average daily shade \nranged from 34% at PTR-08 to 92% at PTR- 07. The majority of the solar pathfinder \nmeasurements documented relatively dense shrub cover which was observed along much \nof Peterson Creek and measured at si tes PTR-03, PTR-04 and PTR-07. Forested \nconditions in the headwaters were document ed at the PTR-02 site, while open pasture \nconditions in areas of irrigated agricultu re were documented at the PTR-08 site. \n \nTable 2-2. Solar Pathfinder Sites. \nTemperature \nData Logger \nSite Stream Site Description Average \nDaily \nShade Average \nAzimuth Average \nBankfull \nWidth \n(Feet) Average \nWetted \nWidth \n(Feet) \nPTR-02 Tributar\ny 1 Conifers with graminoid understory, \nrelatively narrow and flat valley, \nheadwater tributary, grazed 71% 183% 7.8 4.7 Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-10 Table 2-2. Solar Pathfinder Sites. \nTemperature \nData Logger \nSite Stream Site Description Average \nDaily \nShade Average \nAzimuth Average \nBankfull \nWidth \n(Feet) Average \nWetted \nWidth \n(Feet) \nPTR-03 Peterson \nCreek Dense willow and alder in valley \nbottom, sparse cottonwoods, graminoid understory, influenced \nby beaver ponds, grazed 87% 39% 14.0 8.5 \nPTR-04 Peterson \nCreek Alders, willow, sparse cottonwood, graminoid understory, conifers on \nhillslopes, grazed, evidence of pugging and hummocking 77% 33% 9.8 5.1 \nPTR-07 Peterson \nCreek Willows with graminoid understory, entrenched gulch, grazed 92% 28% 8.0 6.9 \nPTR-08 Peterson \nCreek Tall grass hayfield with buffer 34% 23% 8.1 5.0 \n \n4. Following field data collection, a GIS project wa s initiated to evaluate riparian conditions \nalong Peterson Creek using National Agricultur al Imagery Program (NAIP) color aerial \nimagery from 2005, along with high-resolu tion color orthophotographs from May 20th, \n2004 collected in the vicinity of Deer Lodge . Information prepared during Montana \nDEQ’s recent Upper Clark Fork TPA Aerial Assessment Reach Stratification project was \nalso reviewed. For this project, the 1:24,000 USGS NHD layer was used for Peterson Creek, while the 1:100,000 NHD layer was used to identify tributary stre ams. A total of \n10 reaches were delineated along Peterson Creek based on changes in vegetation type, changes in stream aspect, and tributary inputs. These 10 reaches were used to break Peterson Creek into 10 stream segments in the QUAL2K model. QUAL2K model \nsegments were identified as “PCT” in this report, which indicates “Peterson Creek \nTemperature” reaches (Table 2-3, Figure 2-1 ). \n \nTable 2-3. Peterson Creek Temperature (PCT) Reach Descriptions. \nReach Description \nMainstem \nheadwater The Mainstem Headwater Reach ex tended from the headwaters downs tream to the confluence with \nTributary 1. The data logger PTR-01 was locat ed at the break between the Mainstem Headwater \nReach and Reach PCT1. Vegetation included conifers in the overstory with shrubs in the understory. \nPCT1 Reach PCT1 extended from Tribut ary 1 downstream to a road crossing that is associated with a slight \naspect change as well as a change in riparian vegetation. Water from Tributary 1 was added to this \nreach at the same temperature as recorded at PTR-01 . Tributary 1 is apparently larger than Peterson \nCreek at the confluence. Vegetation included conifers in the overstory with shrubs in the understory. \nPCT2 Reach PCT2 extends from the road crossing downstream past data logger PTR-03 to a change in \nvegetation. Tributary 2 and Tributary 3 enter this reach upstream of the PTR-03 data logger. Temperatures were elevated at the PTR-03 data logge r, so the two tributary streams were added in at \nthe same temperature that was recorded in Jack Creek (PTR-05). There was an irrigation withdrawal \nthat appeared to be downstream of the PTR-03 logger. Vegetation included shrubs in the valley \nbottom and conifers on the hillslopes. Beaver ponds were observed during the 2007 field assessment. \nPCT3 Reach PCT3 extended from a vegetation break to an aspect break. There are no data loggers and no \ntributary inputs. Vegetation included sparse deciduous trees and shrubs in the valley bottom and \nconifers on the hillslopes. Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-11 Table 2-3. Peterson Creek Temperature (PCT) Reach Descriptions. \nReach Description \nPCT4 Reach PCT4 extended down to the confluence with Jack Creek. A small input of groundwater was \nadded to this reach. Vegetation includes deciduous trees and shrubs in the valley bottom and conifers \non the hillslopes. This r each marked the lowest extend of coniferous vegetation. \nPCT5 Reach PCT5 extended from th e confluence with Jack Creek downst ream to the upstream end of the \nhayfield and the start of irrigated agriculture. Th is reach included data logger PTR-07. Jack Creek \nwas smaller than Peterson Creek at their confluence. Temperature data (PTR-05) and flow data from \nJack Creek were applied to the model. Flows in th is reach decreased due to irrigation withdrawals as \ndocumented by streamflow measurements at data l ogger PTR-07. Streamflows then increase again \nby the lower end of the reach (PTR-08) likely due to irrigation return flows. Irrigation return flows were modeled at the same temperature as measured in Jack Creek (PTR-05). Vegetation included \nshrubs in the valley bottom. \nPCT6 Reach PCT6 included the irrigated hayfield through which this entire reach flows. Data logger PTR-\n09 was located in this reach along with the PTR-08 shade assessment site. No irrigation withdrawals \nwere identified in this reach due to a lack of st reamflow data. An assessment of aerial imagery \nindicated there were irrigation withdrawals within th is reach. Vegetation included open pasture and \nirrigated agriculture. \nPCT7 Reach PCT7 began at the c onfluence with Burnt Hollow Creek which was smaller than Peterson \nCreek. Reach PCT7 flows thr ough an area of irrigated agri culture and includes PTR-12. \nStreamflows increased slightly at the upper end of the reach as docu mented at PTR-12 and this was \nattributed to downstream irrigation return flows. Progressing through the reach, streamflow then \ndecreased likely due to irrigation withdrawals. The measured temperatures at PTR-12 were the \nhighest of the study area. Vegetation included shrubs alternating with open pasture areas and sparse deciduous trees. Beaver dams were appa rent in the 2004 aerial imagery. \nPCT8 Reach PCT8 extended downstream from the I-90 crossing to wh ere the channel became channelized \nalong the east side of Deer Lodge. No losses or gains in streamflow were identified within this reach. \nVegetation included shrubs and sparse deciduous trees. \nPCT9 Reach PCT 9 was channelized along the east side of Deer Lodge. Vegetation included shrubs and \nsparse deciduous trees alternativ e with open pasture areas. Upper Clark Fork River Tributaries Sedime nt, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework for Water Quality Restoration – \nAppendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-12 Figure 2-1. Peterson Creek Moni toring Sites and Reaches. \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-13 5. Solar pathfinder data collected at five sites in the Peterson Creek watershed were used to \nassign shading values to assessed reaches in the QUAL2K model. Reaches in which the \nsolar pathfinder data were applied direc tly included PCT2, PCT4 and PCT6 based on \nsolar pathfinder sites PTR-03, PTR-04 and PT R-08, respectively. For reaches in which \nno solar pathfinder data were collected, shad e values were extrapolated from assessed \nreaches based on similar riparian vegetation characteristics as observed in GIS using \ncolor aerial imagery from 2004 and 2005 ( Table 2-4 ). In addition, reaches PCT5, PCT7 \nand PCT8 were assigned hourly shade values based on the average of shade measurements at sites PTR-07 and PTR-08 since the aerial assessment indicated that these reaches alternated between dense ripa rian vegetation and open areas. Combining \ndata from sites PTR-07 and PTR-08 resulted in a reach average shade value of 63% \n(Attachment C ). \n \nTable 2-4. Solar Pathfinder Shade Data Applied in QUAL2K.\n \nReach QUAL2K Reach Identifier Solar Pathfinder \nMeasurement Performed Solar Pathfinder \nMeasurement Applied \n1 Mainstem headwater No PTR-02 \n2 PCT1 No PTR-02 \n3 PCT2 PTR-03 PTR-03 \n4 PCT3 No PTR-04 \n5 PCT4 PTR-04 PTR-04 \n6 PCT5 PTR-07 PTR-07/08 \n7 PCT6 PTR-08 PTR-08 \n8 PCT7 No PTR-07/08 \n9 PCT8 No PTR-07/08 \n10 PCT9 No PTR-08 \n \n6. Climatic data inputs for the QUAL2K model were obtained from the Pacific Northwest Cooperative Agricultural Weather Network (AgriMet) site in Deer Lodge, Montana \n(http://www.usbr.gov/pn/agr imet/webaghrread.html ) and included air temperature, dew \npoint temperature and wind speed. Wind speed was reduced to 0 m/s under the \nassumption that this small stream is relati vely sheltered from the wind. The dew point \ntemperature was adjusted by increasing th e relative humidity by 15% based on local \nconditions within the stream corridor as measur ed in a similar assessment in the Big Hole \nRiver watershed (Flynn et. al. 2008). Cl oud cover was assumed to be 0% in the \nQUAL2K model. \n 7. To evaluate tributary and groundwater inputs and water withdrawals along Peterson \nCreek, a hydrologic balance was created ( Table 2-5 ). Flows were balanced at the outlet \nof each reach and at each data logger site where flows were measured. Where tributaries \nwere present in a reach, increases in streamfl ow were entirely attri buted to the tributary \ninflows. When no tributaries were presen t, inputs were attrib uted to groundwater \ndischarge in the upper watershed and to irriga tion return flows in the lower watershed. \nGroundwater inputs were assi gned a temperature of 11.0°C based on the results of a \nsimilar modeling effort in the Big Hole River watershed, which shares a hydrologic \nboundary with the Upper Clark Fork River wate rshed in which Peterson Creek is located Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-14 (Flynn et. al. 2008). Streamflow decreases were considered due to irrigation \nwithdrawals, which are evident in the aerial imagery. Inflows were treated as follows: \n• Trib 1 enters at the same temperature as PTR-1 (Peterson mainstem headwater) \n• Tribs 2 and 3 enter at the same te mperature as PTR-05 (Jack Creek) \n• Trib 4 enters at the same temper ature as PTR-11 (Burnt Hollow Creek) \n• Inflows in Reaches 6 and 8 enter at the same temperature as PTR-11 \n \nTable 2-5. Hydrologic Balance for Peterson Creek. \nReach ID Hydrologic Balance (cms) \n0.0010 headwaters (GW temp) \n0.0027 groundwater gain \n0.0037 flow at outlet of 1 Mainstem \nheadwaters \n0.0037 PTR-01 \n0.0156 PTR-02, trib 1 PCT1 \n0.0193 flow at outlet of 2 \n0.0163 trib 2 \n0.0082 trib 3 \n0.0438 flow at outlet of 3 PCT2 \n0.0438 PTR-03 \nPCT3 0.0438 flow at outlet of 4 \n0.0054 groundwater gain \n0.0492 flow at outlet of 5 PCT4 \n0.0492 PTR-04 \n0.0164 PTR-05, Jack Creek \n0.0656 sum of Peterson and Jack Creek \n0.0209 irrigation loss \n0.0447 PTR-07 \n0.0107 irrigation return \n0.0554 flow at outlet of 6 PCT5 \n0.0554 PTR-08 \nPCT6 0.0554 flow at outlet of 7 \n0.0027 PTR-11, Burnt Hollow Creek \n0.0581 sum of Peterson and Burnt Hollow Creek \n0.0024 irrigation return \n0.0605 PTR-12 \n0.0014 trib 4 \n0.0619 sum of Peterson and trib 4 \n0.0443 irrigation loss \n0.0176 flow at outlet of 8 PCT7 \n0.0176 PTR-13 \nPCT8 0.0176 flow at outlet of 9 \n0.0057 irrigation loss \n0.0119 flow at outlet of 10 PCT9 \n0.0119 PTR-14 \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-15 2.2.2 Baseline Scenario \n \nOnce the above calibration steps were performed, the QUAL2K model was run for the baseline \nscenario which is intended to represent ex isting conditions in Peterson Creek on July 21st, 2007 \n(Figure 2-2 ). This model run utilized all measured fi eld data, with the assumptions described in \nSection 2.2.1 of this document. The model failed to accurately predict the dramatic increase in \ntemperatures that were actually measured betw een sites PTR-01 and PTR-03 at the upper end of \nPeterson Creek. Poor model calibration between sites PTR-01 and PTR-03 was thought to be \nprimarily due to the small size of this stream relative to the influen ce of riparian shading. \nHydraulic output in the model accurately reflec ted measured conditions, indicating that water \nrouting and channel morphology were adequate ly calibrated. Seve ral additional model \ncalibration steps were taken in an attempt to increase temperatures between site PTR-01 and \nPTR-03. Decreasing shade to 0% was required to accomplish this task. Since this appeared unrealistic based on a review of aerial imager y and on-the-ground observations, the decision was \nmade to retain the baseline scenario as depicted in Figure 2-2 with the understanding that it does \nnot accurately represent temperature values measured in the field, especially in the upper reaches \nof Peterson Creek. Model scenario s were compared to the results of the baseline model and not \nto the field measured values to assure consiste ncy when evaluating the po tential to reduce stream \ntemperatures. \nFigure 2-2. QUAL2K Baseline (Exi sting Conditions) Scenario. \nPeterson Creek (7/21/2007) Mainstem\nExisting Conditions\n051015202530\n5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00Temp(C) Average Mean Temp-data Temp(C ) Minimum\nTemp(C) Maximum Minimum Temp-data Maxi mum Temp-data\n \nPoint measurements progressing downstream: PTR-01, PTR-03, PTR-07, PTR-09, PTR-12, PTR-13, and PTR-14. \nJack Creek confluence above PTR-07. Burnt Hollow Creek above PTR-12. I-90 crossing at PTR-13. \n \nThe baseline scenario model run indicated that stream temperatures remained relatively cool \ndownstream to the confluence with Jack Creek and the PTR-07 data logger. In contrast, actual \ntemperature measurements in 2007 indicated wate r temperature increases near the PTR-03 data \nlogger followed by relatively constant temperatur es progressing downstream all the way to the \nmouth. Modeled stream temperatures increase d between Jack Creek and Burnt Hollow Creek, Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-16 followed by downstream temperatures decreases. The maximum measured temperature was \nrecorded at the PTR-12 data logg er, which was located downstream of the confluence with Burnt \nHollow Creek. Both the modeled and measured temperatures decreased as Peterson Creek \napproached the I-90 crossing. This may have been due to what appeared to be a large beaver \ncomplex within reach PCT7. Downstream of the I-90 crossing, both modeled and measured \ntemperatures again increased. Thus, the result s of the baseline modeling effort and 2007 field \ntemperature measurements indicated that Peters on Creek from the Jack Creek confluence and \ncontinuing downstream past Burnt Hollow Creek , and Peterson Creek downstream of the I-90 \ncrossing, may be negatively influenc ed by elevated water temperatures. \n \n2.2.3 Shade Scenario \n In the shade modeling scenario, areas with presently diminished shade conditions were changed \nto an unperturbed reference condition based on field measured shade values. Reaches of \nPeterson Creek extending from the headwaters to Jack Creek (through reach PCT4) were \nconsidered to be at their potential shade leve ls, with reach average shade values of 71-87%. \nReaches of Peterson Creek from the confluen ce with Jack Creek dow nstream to the mouth, \nReaches PCT5 through PCT9, were assigned an es timated reference shade value of 86% based \non the average of the hourly measurements at sites PTR-03, PTR-04 and PTR-07 ( Attachment \nC). Since no actual measurements were made for reference conditions where dense riparian \nvegetation covered the channel, the 85% value was applied as an estimate of reference \nconditions. If additional data become availabl e for reference conditions, the 85% value may be \nadjusted accordingly. All other pa rameters from the baseline scenario were retained. The results \nof shade scenario 1 indicated a dramatic decrea se in maximum temperatures, particularly in \nreaches PCT6 and PCT9 which were generally lacking woody shrub cover ( Figure 2-3 ). The \ndramatic modeled temperature reductions were likely influenced by the minimal flow and \nassociated small buffering capacity of this small stream. Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-17 Figure 2-3. QUAL2K Shade Scenario 1. \nPeterson Creek (7/21/2007) Mainstem\nShade Scenario 1\n051015202530\n5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00Temp(C) Average Mean Temp-data Temp(C ) Minimum\nTemp(C) Maximum Minimum Temp-data Maximum Temp -data\n \nPoint measurements progressing downstream: PTR-01, PTR-03, PTR-07, PTR-09, PTR-12, PTR-13, and PTR-14. \nJack Creek confluence above PTR-07. Burnt Hollow Creek above PTR-12. I-90 crossing at PTR-13. \n \nTo further evaluate the influence of shade, a s econd scenario was assessed in which the estimated \nreference value derived from the average hour ly measurements at sites PTR-03, PTR-04 and \nPTR-07 were applied only to reaches PCT6 and PCT9. These two reaches had extensive areas of \nopen pasture and minimal riparian shrub cover as observed on aerial imagery from 2004 and \n2005. All other parameters from the baseline sc enario were retained, including shade values \nalong PCT7 since aerial imagery indicated th ere was a relatively dense band of riparian \nvegetation along much of this reach. In addi tion, a more detailed a ssessment of riparian \nvegetation along one 500-foot reach within reach PCT7 in 2007 found that riparian shrub cover \nalong the channel margin averaged 53% and ra nged from 35% to 65%. The second shade \nscenario also led to a substantial decrease in maximum temperatures ( Figure 2-4 ). This scenario \nwas determined to best represent the potential to decrease stream te mperatures by increasing \nshade along selected reaches of Peterson Creek. Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-18 Figure 2-4. QUAL2K Shade Scenario 2. \nPeterson Creek (7/21/2007) Mainstem\nShade Scenario 2\n051015202530\n5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00 Temp(C) Average Mean Temp-data Temp(C) Mi nimum\nTemp(C) Maximum Minimum Temp-data Maximum T emp-data\n \nPoint measurements progressing downstream: PTR-01, PTR-03, PTR-07, PTR-09, PTR-12, PTR-13, and PTR-14. \nJack Creek confluence above PTR-07. Burnt Hollow Creek above PTR-12. I-90 crossing at PTR-13. \n \n2.2.4 Channel Morphology Scenario \n \nWhen applying the QUAL2K model in temperatur e assessments, a channe l morphology scenario \nthat examines the influence of channel over-wi dening is often applied. However, field data \ncollected in 2007 documented low wi dth/depth ratios, suggesting th ere was minimal potential to \nfurther reduce stream channel width. Thus, the channel morphology modeling scenario was not applied to the Peterson Creek temperature assessment. \n2.2.5 Water Consumptive Use Scenario \n The water consumptive use scenario describes the thermal effect of irri gation and domestic water \nuses on water temperatures in Peterson Creek. This scenario was modeled by removing existing water diversions from the study reach as identified in the hydrologic balance ( Table 2-5 ). The \ncurrent modeling effort included irrigation withdraw als identified in three reaches: PCT5, PCT7 \nand PCT9. Warm water irrigation return flow s were also removed from reaches PCT5 and \nPCT7. Additional irrigation wit hdrawals not identifie d through field measurements in 2007 may \nbe present, but were not accounted for in th is modeling exercise. These included observed \nwithdrawals in reaches PCT2 and PCT6. All othe r parameters from the baseline scenario were \nretained. This scenario indicated that water with drawals have a lesser po tential impact on stream \ntemperatures than riparian shading ( Figure 2-5 ). The model indicated th at slight decreases in \ntemperature could be achieved through water conservation in reach PCT6 upstream of the \nconfluence with Burnt Hollow Creek and reach PCT9 through the City of Deer Lodge. Due to a \nlack of measurements of irrigation withdrawal s throughout the system, th e results of the water \nconsumptive use scenario should be interpreted with caution . If more detailed flow data for the \nirrigation network becomes available, this scenario may need to be reevaluated. Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-19 Figure 2-5. QUAL2K Water Consumptive Use Scenario. \nPeterson Creek (7/21/2007) Mainstem\nWater Consumptive Use Scenario\n051015202530\n5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00Temp(C) Average Mean Temp-data Temp(C ) Minimum\nTemp(C) Maximum Minimum Temp-data Maximum Temp -data\n \nPoint measurements progressing downstream: PTR-01, PTR-03, PTR-07, PTR-09, PTR-12, PTR-13, and PTR-14. \nJack Creek confluence above PTR-07. Burnt Hollow Creek above PTR-12. I-90 crossing at PTR-13. \n \nNote that streamflow measurements in July of 2007 document a maximum flow in Peterson \nCreek of 2.1 cfs at site PTR-12, with flows th en decreasing to 0.4 cfs by the mouth (site PTR-\n14), which is a distance of approximately 2.6 miles. This section of Peterson Creek may be an \nappropriate area on which to focus water manage ment activities since flows were observed to \ndecrease by 80% in this reach, which extends from downstream of the confluence with Burnt \nHollow Creek to the mouth. \n2.2.6 Natural Condition Scenario \n The natural condition scenario refl ects the temperature regime that would be expected absent of \nthe influence of man. This allows for the characterization of the ex tent of the departure from the \nnatural condition. Factors applied in shade scenario 1 (ref erence shade) and the water \nconsumptive use scenario (no irrigation withdrawals) were applied to run th is scenario. All other \nparameters from the baseline scenario were reta ined. The natural condit ion scenario indicated \nthat maximum temperatures at the mouth of Pe terson Creek could be approximately 15°F cooler \nthan the modeled maximum temperature of 78.3°F ( Figure 2-6 ). The measured maximum \ntemperature on July 21\nst of 2007 was 75.8°F at the mouth (PTR -14), while the natural condition \nscenario results in a maximum temperature of 62.7°F ( Attachment D ), suggesting water \ntemperatures could be approximately 13°F cooler at the mouth of Peterson Creek. The seasonal \nmaximum value at site PTR-14 was 78.0°F on July 22nd (Attachment A ). Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-20 Figure 2-6. QUAL2K Natura l Condition Scenario. \nPeterson Creek (7/21/2007) Mainstem\nNatural Condition Scenario\n051015202530\n5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00 Temp(C) Average Mean Temp-data Temp(C ) Minimum\nTemp(C) Maximum Minimum Temp-data Maximum Te mp-data\n \nPoint measurements progressing downstream: PTR-01, PTR-03, PTR-07, PTR-09, PTR-12, PTR-13, and PTR-14. \nJack Creek confluence above PTR-07. Burnt Hollow Creek above PTR-12. I-90 crossing at PTR-13. \n \n2.2.7 Naturally Occurring Scenario (ARM 17.30.602) \n \nThe naturally occurring scenario defines wa ter temperature conditi ons resulting from the \nimplementation of all reasonable land, soil and wa ter conservation practices as outlined in ARM \n17.30.602. This scenario identifies the “naturally occurring” temperature in water bodies of \ninterest and establishes the te mperatures to which a 0.23°C (0.5°F) temperature increase is \nallowable. This, in turn, can be used to iden tify the impairment status of a water body. This \nscenario included improved shading in reaches PC T6 and PCT9 as suggested by shade scenario 2 \nalong with a 15% increase in irrigation and domesti c water use efficiency. This was calculated \nby reducing the three identified irrigation with drawals by 15%. The result of the naturally \noccurring scenario was similar to the result of shade scenario 2, with s ubstantial reductions in \ntemperature predicted in Peters on Creek downstream of the conflu ence with Jack Creek. Based \non the naturally occurring scen ario, a maximum temperature of 68.6°F was predicted at the \nmouth of Peterson Creek and there is the potentia l for an approximately 10°F reduction in in-\nstream temperatures relative to the baseline scenario (Attachment D ). Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-21 Figure 2-7. QUAL2K Natura lly Occurring Scenario. \nPeterson Creek (7/21/2007) Mainstem\nNaturally Occurring Scenario\n051015202530\n5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00Temp(C) Average Mean Temp-data Temp(C ) Minimum\nTemp(C) Maximum Minimum Temp-data Maximum Temp -data\n \nPoint measurements progressing downstream: PTR-01, PTR-03, PTR-07, PTR-09, PTR-12, PTR-13, and PTR-14. \nJack Creek confluence above PTR-07. Burnt Hollow Creek above PTR-12. I-90 crossing at PTR-13. \n \n2.3 Peterson Creek Modeled Temperature Relative to Montana Standards \n \nThe naturally occurring scenario indicated that water temperatures greater than 66.5°F can be \nexpected in Peterson Creek. Thus, the maximu m allowable increase in temperature due to \nunmitigated human causes is 0.5°F (0.23°C) (see Section 1.1 ). This standard was exceeded at \nthe lower-most four monitoring sites on Peters on Creek, which represents Peterson Creek from \ndownstream of Jack Creek to the conf luence with the Clark Fork River ( Table 2-6 , results for \neach modeling scenario presented in Attachment D ). The majority of the temperature reduction \npotential predicted by the QUAL2K model resulted from increased sh ade, as presented in shade \nscenario 2 ( Figure 2-4 ), with an additional smaller reduction in temperatures resulting from \nimproved irrigation and domestic wate r management. As discussed in Section 2.2.3 , the \ndramatic modeled temperature reductions were lik ely a result of the minimal flow in this small \nstream. Due to the minimal amount of flow, ther e may be a substantial amount of error in the \nQUAL2K model. However, temperature data coll ected in 2007 and the results of this QUAL2K \nmodeling effort suggest that Peterson Creek fails to meet Montana’s standard for temperature \nduring low flow periods in the middle of summer and that an increase in riparian shading, \nparticularly along reaches PCT6 a nd PCT9 will likely lead to a decrease in water temperatures. Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-22 \nTable 2-6. Peterson Creek Temperatures Rela tive to Montana’s Water Quality Standards. \nField Measured \nData QUAL2K Existing \nConditions QUAL2K \nNaturally \nOccurring \nScenario Data \nLogger \nSite \nMaximum \nTemperature (ºF) Maximum \nTemperature (ºF) Departure \nfrom Field \nData (ºF) \nMaximum \nTemperature (ºF) Departure \nfrom Existing \nConditions \nModel (ºF) \nPTR-01 60.0 63.5 3.53 63.5 0.00 \nPTR-03 69.4 67.5 -1.89 67.5 0.00 \nPTR-07 71.0 68.4 -2.54 68.4 0.00 \nPTR-09 71.9 78.2 6.23 66.9 -11.21 \nPTR-12 72.4 77.3 4.86 67.6 -9.61 \nPTR-13 66.6 73.6 6.97 70.1 -3.47 \nPTR-14 75.8 78.3 2.43 68.6 -9.72 \nBold text indicates violation of Montana’s water quality standard. \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-23 SECTION 3.0 \nCONCLUSIONS \n \nThis assessment indicated that Peterson Creek is impaired due to elevated water temperatures during low flow periods in the middl e of summer. Overall, the resu lts of this study indicated that \nPeterson Creek downstream of the confluence with Jack Creek should be the focus of restoration \nefforts directed towards decreasing wate r temperatures in Peterson Creek. \n Major findings and restora tion recommendations include: \n• Temperature data collected in 2007 and the results of th is QUAL2K modeling \neffort suggest that Peterson Creek fa ils to meet Montana’s standard for \ntemperature during low flow peri ods in the middle of summer. \n \n• Modeling indicated that increased shad ing in reaches PCT6 and PCT9 would \nlikely have the greatest impact on water temperatures in Peterson Creek. Reach \nPCT6 extends upstream of the Burnt Hollow Creek confluence, while Reach \nPCT9 flows through the town of Deer Lodge. In 2007, maximum temperatures \nwere observed at site PTR-12 in reach PC T7, which is located downstream of the \nBurnt Hollow Creek confluence. This fu rther supports the need for improved \nriparian shading upstream of this site. \n \n• Maximum streamflows were observed at PT R-12, which is located downstream of \nthe Burnt Hollow Creek confluence. Streamflows decreased by 80% between this site and the confluence with the Clark Fo rk River. Thus, irrigation efficiency \nimprovements should focus on Peterson Creek downstream of the confluence with Burnt Hollow Creek. \n Limitations of this study include a lack of detailed flow measur ements for the irrigation network, \na lack of reference conditions da ta for riparian shading, and potential limitations of the QUAL2K \nmodel when working with such a small stream. T hus, the results of this assessment may need to \nbe reevaluated as additional information becomes available. Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-24 Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-25 SECTION 4.0 \nREFERENCES \n \nFlynn, K., Kron, D., Granger, M. 2008. Modeling St reamflow and Water Temperature in the Big \nHole River, Montana – 2006. Contributing auth ors K. Flynn, D. Kron and M. Granger, M. 2008. \nTMDL Technical Report DMS-2008-03. Montana Department of Environmental Quality. \nHelena, MT. MDEQ 2007. Upper Clark Fork TMDL Planning Area Temperature and Instantaneous Flow Monitoring Sampling and Analysis Plan. Prepar ed by Montana Department of Environmental \nQuality. Helena, MT. \n \n \n \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-26 Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-27 ATTACHMENT A \n2007 TEMPERATURE DATA SUMMARY UPPER CLARK FORK TMDL \nPLANNING AREA Upper Clark Fork River Tributaries Sedime nt, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework for Water Quality Restoration – \nAppendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-28 Site ID Site Name Lat Long Start Date Stop date Seasonal Maximum Seasonal Minimum Seasonal Max ΔT 7-Day averages\nDate Value Date Value Date Value Date Maximum Δ Minimum T\n59.8 11.3\n63.1 10.0\n62.6 7.6\n63.2 8.662.5 10.0\n57.5 10.6\n50.7 12.6\n59.5 14.5\n60.4 14.8PTR-05 617318 46.3176 112.6628 07/18/07 09/25/07 07/20/07 72.5 09/ 25/07 38.2 08/11/07 14.9 07/21/07 71.1\nPTR-12 617341 46.37078 112.69884 07/19/07 09/25/07 07/20/07 75.8 09/25/07 41.5 07/28/07 14.1 07/22/07 73.1\nPTR-03 617386 46.2844 112.614 07/18/07 09/25/07 07/19/07 71.8 09/ 25/07 40.1 07/22/07 10.2 07/21/07 70.1\nPTR-07 617400 46.3248 112.6673 07/18/07 09/25/07 07/20/07 73.4 09/ 25/07 41.5 08/11/07 14.2 07/21/07 71.8\nPTR-09 650637 46.35066 112.6822 07/18/07 09/25/07 07/28/07 74.4 09/ 25/07 40.4 09/02/07 15.4 07/21/07 72.5\nPTR-13 650641 46.3878 112.7207 07/18/07 09/25/07 07/19/07 73.4 09/ 25/07 41.0 09/11/07 15.7 07/21/07 68.1\nPTR-01 650664 46.27683 112.58129 07/17/07 09/25/07 07/17/07 80.3 09/25/07 36.2 07/17/07 27.9 07/20/07 63.3\nPTR-11 650710 46.3625 112.6857 07/18/07 09/25/07 07/22/07 76.0 09/ 25/07 43.2 07/22/07 18.6 07/21/07 74.0\nPTR-14 650711 46.38944 112.73567 07/19/07 09/25/07 07/22/07 78.0 09/25/07 39.3 07/22/07 20.1 07/22/07 75.2\nSite ID Site Name Days > Days > Days > Hours > Hours > Hours > Warmest day of 7-day max Agency\n50 F 59 F 70 F 50 F 59 F 70 F Date Maximum Minimum\nPTR-05 617318 65 47 9 1245.5 570.5 32.0 07/18/07 72.5 60.0 DEQ\nPTR-12 617341 63 50 13 1406.5 757.0 86.5 07/20/07 75.8 62.5 DEQ\nPTR-03 617386 64 47 7 1389.5 680.0 28.0 07/19/07 71.8 63.6 DEQ\nPTR-07 617400 67 56 14 1456.0 849.0 76.5 07/18/07 73.4 61.4 DEQ\nPTR-09 650637 65 52 14 1407.5 752.5 82.5 07/20/07 74.4 62.3 DEQ\nPTR-13 650641 64 42 3 1193.5 327.0 14.0 07/19/07 73.4 62.3 DEQ\nPTR-01 650664 52 16 1 818.0 56.5 11.5 07/17/07 80.3 52.4 DEQ\nPTR-11 650710 69 60 16 1529.5 891.0 100.5 07/20/07 76.0 58.3 DEQ\nPTR-14 650711 67 49 10 1326.5 612.5 67.5 07/22/07 78.0 57.9 DEQ\n \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-29 ATTACHMENT B \nSTREAMFLOW DATA UPPER CLARK FORK TMDL PLANNING AREA Upper Clark Fork River Tributaries Sediment , Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framew ork for Water Quality Restoration – Append ix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-30 Site Information Deployment Retrieval \nSite ID Serial # Latitude Longitude Date Time Flow \n(cfs) Site Description Date Time Flow \n(cfs) Notes \nPTR-01 650664 46.2768 112.5813 7/16/2007 11:24 0.131 just d/s of aspen 9/26/2007 9:40 0.015 Brick/logger in some sediment/sligh t sed in PVC \nPTR-02 650682 46.2792 112.5790 7/16/2007 10:40 0.554 1st clearing, ~0.3 miles from PTR-01, under left bank 9/26/2007 8:40 0.052 Clean, bad file - only 10 days of results \nPTR-03 617386 46.2844 112.6140 7/17/2007 12:03 1.553 btwn two cow crossings 9/26/2007 10:17 0.251 Logger in some sediment but n o sed in PVC \nPTR-04 530261 46.3172 112.6629 7/17/2007 13:33 1.743 Unshaded open bend 9/26/2007 13:00 0.182 No retrieval - lost \nPTR-05 617318 46.3176 112.6628 7/17/2007 13:11 0.581 Under an alder tree ~150' u/s of cottonwood stand 9/26/2007 12:22 0.074 Some debris in PVC pipe but not clogged \nPTR-07 617400 46.3248 112.6673 7/17/2007 16:19 1.688 just d/s of fence line, ~120' d/s of cattle xing in willow clearing 9/26/2 007 16:40 0.308 PVC pipe covered w/ layer of sand, not clogged \nPTR-08 n/a 46.3316 112.6701 7/17/2007 16:53 1.961 n/a 9/26/2007 n/a 0.296 n/a \nPTR-09 650637 46.3507 112.6822 7/17/2007 17:26 N/A deployed @ shuman ranch bridge crossing 9/26/2007 15:12 Logger was clean \nPTR-11 650710 46.3625 112.6857 7/17/2007 NA 0.095 ~10' d/s of manmade pond on Shiek house, d/s of culvert 9/26/2007 17:54 N/A immeasurable flow but PVC not clogged. Some algae on brick/PVC \nPTR-12 617341 46.3708 112.6984 7/18/2007 8:54 2.144 Rinsen property wooden bridge xing in cowfield adjacent to house 9/26/2007 18:15 0.326 PVC partially filled with fine sediment, but flow passing through \nPTR-13 650641 46.3878 112.7207 7/17/2007 19:33 0.623 ~ 10-15' u/s of culvert 9/26/2007 18:36 clean \nPTR-14 650711 46.3894 112.7357 7/18/2007 9:52 0.420 on u/s side of culvert 9/26/2007 18:50 0.072 minimal sediment in PVC \n \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-31 \nATTACHMENT C \nSOLAR PATHFINDER DATA UPPER CLARK FORK TMDL PLANNING \nAREA Upper Clark Fork River Tributaries Sedime nt, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework for Water Quality Restoration – \nAppendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-32 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:0\nReach0 PM TOTAL\nPTR02-1 358 1 0 1 21 21 2 153 84\nPTR02-2 Transect 2 3 3.5 0 0 0 1 12 12 10 8 5 3 58\nPTR02-3 Transect 3 3589 3 0 0 05853 49\nPTR02 Average % 100% 90% 67% 63% 42% 36% 67% 56% 67% 71% 100% 100% 71%\nPTR03-1 Transect 1 356 1 0 1 21 21 000753 73\nPTR03-2 Transect 2 3 5 6 2.5 2 10.5 12 12 10 8 5 3 79\nPTR03-3 Transect 3 3 5 8 10 12 10 12 12 10 8 5 3 98\nPTR03 Average % 100% 100% 83% 75% 72% 90% 94% 67% 67% 96% 100% 100% 87%\nPTR04-1 Transect 1 358 6 . 5 1 0 0 03842 41\nPTR04-2 Transect 2 3 5 8 10 12 12 12 12 10 8 5 3 100\nPTR04-3 Transect 3 3 5 0 0 3 12 12 12 10 8 5 3 73\nPTR04 Average % 100% 100% 67% 55% 44% 67% 67% 67% 77% 100% 93% 89% 77%\nPTR07-1 Transect 1 3575 7 7 1 08 7 . 5 853 76\nPTR07-2 Transect 2 3 5 8 10 12 12 12 12 10 8 5 3 100\nPTR07-3 Transect 3 3 3 . 5 61 01 2 1 2 1 01 2 1 08 5 3 95\nPTR07 Average % 100% 90% 88% 83% 86% 86% 89% 89% 92% 100% 100% 100% 92%\nPTR08-1 Transect 1 3100 0 0 0 00002 6\nPTR08-2 Transect 2 3 5 5 0 0 10.5 12 12 10 8 5 3 74\nPTR08-3 Transect 3 2000 0 0 0 00001 3\nPTR08 Average % 89% 40% 21% 0% 0% 29% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 67% 34%\nPTR07/08 Average % 94% 65% 54% 42% 43% 58% 61% 61% 63% 67% 67% 83% 63%\nPTR03/04/07 Average % 100% 97% 79% 71% 68% 81% 83% 74% 78% 99% 98% 96% 85%Potential 3 5 8 10 12 12 12 12 10 8 5 3\nTransect 1 85\n \n Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-33 ATTACHMENT D \nQUAL2K MODEL SCENARIOS UPPER CLARK FORK TMDL \nPLANNING AREA Upper Clark Fork River Tribut aries Sediment, Metals, and Temperature TMDLs and Framework \nfor Water Quality Restoration – Appendix G \n \n3/4/10 Final G-34 Baseline Scenario\nMaximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature Distance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature Data \nLogger \nSiteDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature \n(ºC) (ºF) (ºC) (ºF)\nPTR-01 19.91 15.54 60.0 19.74 17.50 63.5 3.53\nPTR-03 16.80 20.79 69.4 16.32 19.74 67.5 -1.89\nPTR-07 10.23 21.64 71.0 10.19 20.23 68.4 -2.54\nPTR-09 7.07 22.18 71.9 7.47 25.64 78.2 6.23\nPTR-12 4.43 22.44 72.4 4.91 25.14 77.3 4.86\nPTR-13 1.54 19.22 66.6 1.48 23.09 73.6 6.97\nPTR-14 0.12 24.36 75.8 0.20 25.71 78.3 2.43\nData \nLogger \nSiteDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature Shade Scenario 1\nMaximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature Distance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature \n(ºC) (ºF) (ºC) (ºF)\nPTR-01 19.74 17.50 63.5 19.74 17.50 63.5 0.00\nPTR-03 16.32 19.74 67.5 16.32 19.74 67.5 0.00\nPTR-07 10.19 20.23 68.4 10.19 19.25 66.7\nPTR-09 7.47 25.64 78.2 7.47 18.55 65.4\nPTR-12 4.91 25.14 77.3 4.91 18.26 64.9\nPTR-13 1.48 23.09 73.6 1.48 18.42 65.2\nPTR-14 0.20 25.71 78.3 0.20 18.28 64.9\nData \nLogger \nSiteDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature -1.76\n-12.76\n-12.38\n-8.41\n-13.37\nShade Scenario 2\nDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature \n(ºC) (ºF) (ºC) (ºF)\nPTR-01 19.74 17.50 63.5 19.74 17.50 63.5 0.00\nPTR-03 16.32 19.74 67.5 16.32 19.74 67.5 0.00\nPTR-07 10.19 20.23 68.4 10.19 20.23 68.4 0.00\nPTR-09 7.47 25.64 78.2 7.47 19.39 66.9\nPTR-12 4.91 25.14 77.3 4.91 19.81 67.7\nPTR-13 1.48 23.09 73.6 1.48 21.25 70.3\nPTR-14 0.20 25.71 78.3 0.20 20.32 68.6\nData \nLogger \nSiteDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature -11.25\n-9.59\n-3.31\n-9.70\nWater Consumptive Use Scenario\nMaximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature Distance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature \n(ºC) (ºF) (ºC) (ºF)\nPTR-01 19.74 17.50 63.5 19.74 17.50 63.5 0.00\nPTR-03 16.32 19.74 67.5 16.32 19.74 67.5 0.00\nPTR-07 10.19 20.23 68.4 10.19 20.30 68.5 0.13\nPTR-09 7.47 25.64 78.2 7.47 25.30 77.5\nPTR-12 4.91 25.14 77.3 4.91 25.30 77.5 0.29\nPTR-13 1.48 23.09 73.6 1.48 23.51 74.3 0.76\nPTR-14 0.20 25.71 78.3 0.20 24.86 76.7\nData \nLogger \nSiteDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature -0.61\n-1.53\nNatural Condition Scenario\nMaximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature Distance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature \n(ºC) (ºF) (ºC) (ºF)\nPTR-01 19.74 17.50 63.5 19.74 17.50 63.5 0.00\nPTR-03 16.32 19.74 67.5 16.32 19.74 67.5 0.00\nPTR-07 10.19 20.23 68.4 10.19 19.19 66.5\nPTR-09 7.47 25.64 78.2 7.47 18.09 64.6\nPTR-12 4.91 25.14 77.3 4.91 17.59 63.7\nPTR-13 1.48 23.09 73.6 1.48 17.25 63.1\nPTR-14 0.20 25.71 78.3 0.20 17.07 62.7\nData \nLogger \nSiteDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature -1.87\n-13.59\n-13.59\n-10.51\n-15.55\nNaturally Occuring Scenario\nDistance \n(km)Maximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature Maximum \nTemperature \n(ºC) (ºF) (ºC) (ºF)\nPTR-01 19.74 17.50 63.5 19.74 17.50 63.5 0.00\nPTR-03 16.32 19.74 67.5 16.32 19.74 67.5 0.00\nPTR-07 10.19 20.23 68.4 10.19 20.23 68.4 0.00\nPTR-09 7.47 25.64 78.2 7.47 19.41 66.9\nPTR-12 4.91 25.14 77.3 4.91 19.80 67.6\nPTR-13 1.48 23.09 73.6 1.48 21.16 70.1\nPTR-14 0.20 25.71 78.3 0.20 20.31 68.6Q2K Existing Conditions Natural Condition Scenario Departure \nfrom Existing \nConditions \nModel (ºF)Q2K Existing Conditions Q2K Shade Scenario 2 Departure \nfrom Existing \nConditions \nModel (ºF)Field Measured Data\nQ2K Existing Conditions Q2K Water Consumptive Use Scenario Departure \nfrom Existing \nConditions \nModel (ºF)Departure \nfrom Field \nData (ºF)Q2K Existing Conditions\nQ2K Existing Conditions Q2K Shade Scenario 1 Departure \nfrom Existing \nConditions \nModel (ºF)\nQ2K Existing Conditions Naturally Occurring Scenario Departure \nfrom Existing \nConditions \nModel (ºF)\n-11.21\n-9.61\n-3.47\n-9.72 " }

[ -0.117157943546772, 0.1009727269411087, -0.05196978896856308, -0.029913781210780144, 0.0859619528055191, 0.053452856838703156, -0.02053719200193882, 0.040359579026699066, -0.001572233741171658, 0.003290084656327963, 0.1238296777009964, 0.004825964570045471, 0.014721903949975967, -0.05558782443404198, -0.06528690457344055, 0.005034335423260927, -0.08771628886461258, 0.043083883821964264, 0.00793029647320509, -0.012548656202852726, -0.021867645904421806, 0.053054872900247574, 0.035167500376701355, -0.058862023055553436, 0.016755998134613037, 0.10265664011240005, -0.034924816340208054, 0.03704215586185455, 0.011373202316462994, -0.06823054701089859, -0.0014941715635359287, 0.024971075356006622, 0.042875196784734726, 0.03832658380270004, 0.06903216987848282, -0.01890050433576107, -0.03024005889892578, -0.01377895288169384, 0.014706607908010483, 0.01239701732993126, 0.02835935167968273, -0.07072712481021881, 0.06139509752392769, 0.07639845460653305, 0.00034943403443321586, 0.005399687681347132, -0.06714341044425964, 0.007576090283691883, -0.00762993935495615, 0.044381193816661835, -0.05691952630877495, -0.09174253791570663, -0.05487276613712311, 0.11430776119232178, -0.027008380740880966, -0.033206794410943985, -0.06465520709753036, 0.028433268889784813, 0.006711213383823633, 0.0002525792515370995, 0.013185398653149605, 0.0036038358230143785, -0.013033020310103893, 0.02179296500980854, 0.04767695441842079, -0.02003788948059082, 0.039394561201334, -0.04932476952672005, 0.0733092799782753, 0.02171875722706318, 0.031616389751434326, 0.03396344184875488, -0.06415148824453354, -0.036075785756111145, -0.09461774677038193, 0.05325077846646309, -0.004111532587558031, 0.027908729389309883, 0.028096145018935204, -0.14565519988536835, -0.03151323273777962, -0.009337738156318665, -0.0034062834456562996, 0.01294494979083538, 0.03654288128018379, -0.015077775344252586, -0.025647008791565895, -0.0261321309953928, -0.007317562587559223, 0.042963702231645584, 0.06244602054357529, -0.0059989457949995995, 0.06513775140047073, -0.00018569096573628485, -0.09305684268474579, -0.004343941807746887, 0.03622378408908844, 0.07675471901893616, 0.06887105852365494, 0.0584460012614727, -0.035054322332143784, -0.01738593727350235, -0.005063238088041544, 0.021178750321269035, 0.007324403617531061, -0.013206606730818748, -0.034469958394765854, 0.0734613910317421, -0.06731749325990677, -0.06349056959152222, 0.02868884801864624, 0.06620998680591583, 0.0236224178224802, -0.04213140904903412, 0.04282683506608009, 0.03811514377593994, 0.05955492705106735, 0.08438900858163834, -0.007344103883951902, -0.008301354013383389, -0.0024113135877996683, 0.013171275146305561, -0.07557965070009232, -0.04812804237008095, -0.16870498657226562, -0.08214688301086426, 0.00801289826631546, 7.680904901567421e-33, 0.04226069524884224, -0.09130512177944183, -0.057117100805044174, 0.038196735084056854, 0.04297256097197533, 0.03450525924563408, -0.002721145050600171, -0.006083546672016382, -0.07564467936754227, 0.04861566051840782, 0.0036091539077460766, -0.03344748914241791, 0.06331299245357513, -0.12619686126708984, -0.10646726936101913, 0.01642001047730446, -0.05144184082746506, 0.036596689373254776, -0.07604028284549713, -0.005349287763237953, 0.09107903391122818, -0.007963329553604126, 0.015254304744303226, 0.05528339371085167, 0.006960895378142595, 0.03893250599503517, 0.05827943980693817, -0.05462920665740967, 0.011550848372280598, 0.006888412404805422, 0.10243678092956543, -0.002151368884369731, 0.038272492587566376, -0.011175203137099743, 0.06948131322860718, 0.11023391038179398, 0.04542574658989906, -0.04745616391301155, 0.05993039533495903, -0.010533694177865982, -0.001490493887104094, -0.005428544245660305, 0.014576178044080734, -0.040221113711595535, 0.03377823904156685, -0.0637955367565155, -0.00046776991803199053, -0.0003327732265461236, -0.027444520965218544, 0.04533952847123146, -0.010224374011158943, 0.008630297146737576, 0.01797281950712204, -0.03632814437150955, -0.05358776077628136, -0.0021821216214448214, -0.048526518046855927, 0.07769019156694412, 0.014840571209788322, 0.06902213394641876, 0.07697144150733948, 0.10045754164457321, -0.12129630893468857, -0.012959789484739304, -0.055757567286491394, -0.05734117701649666, -0.029573379084467888, -0.06655541062355042, -0.014606625773012638, -0.03610321506857872, 0.01310260221362114, -0.012730659916996956, 0.0822179913520813, -0.02146364003419876, -0.04036349430680275, -0.029820121824741364, -0.04889291524887085, 0.011672726832330227, -0.09109090268611908, -0.03415296971797943, -0.11554968357086182, 0.01355467364192009, 0.0011634425027295947, 0.0021958022844046354, 0.01348091196268797, 0.047088611871004105, -0.030688395723700523, -0.06710405647754669, -0.10071335732936859, -0.015822771936655045, 0.05059221014380455, 0.027782853692770004, 0.03973888233304024, -0.0012057191925123334, 0.05311701446771622, -6.113237349978002e-33, -0.008426222018897533, -0.03172365203499794, -0.01424986682832241, -0.03338117524981499, 0.05139324814081192, -0.0395471453666687, 0.02559397555887699, 0.02730357088148594, -0.026266032829880714, -0.008127833716571331, 0.07123368233442307, -0.04146357253193855, -0.010860004462301731, 0.03460916131734848, -0.04105842486023903, 0.027283230796456337, -0.02931206114590168, 0.04583114758133888, -0.0796075314283371, 0.05060410127043724, 0.09208924323320389, 0.0615234375, 0.03599712252616882, 0.1247350424528122, 0.003397011896595359, 0.006725428160279989, 0.04730457812547684, -0.02087586373090744, -0.015371673740446568, 0.06470360606908798, 0.0033203528728336096, -0.04184312745928764, -0.13486573100090027, 0.1222475916147232, 0.014433377422392368, -0.09103454649448395, 0.044012006372213364, -0.03857908025383949, 0.008935224264860153, 0.07215895503759384, 0.04866093769669533, 0.012909661047160625, 0.002091166330501437, 0.04634587839245796, -0.017117537558078766, 0.06891356408596039, 0.11498165875673294, 0.012779654003679752, 0.04153197258710861, -0.037943221628665924, -0.016027046367526054, 0.02269456908106804, 0.03450930118560791, 0.08879109472036362, 0.020931409671902657, 0.009776032529771328, 0.0627996027469635, -0.06188163161277771, -0.041180577129125595, 0.01757710799574852, 0.06621690094470978, 0.09903529286384583, -0.06541287899017334, -0.00523831881582737, 0.10321207344532013, -0.01895403116941452, -0.06479877978563309, -0.0014954226789996028, 0.03529218211770058, -0.05600135400891304, -0.02631661482155323, -0.033921655267477036, 0.02118225209414959, -0.11127057671546936, 0.03290338069200516, -0.04171378165483475, -0.028541389852762222, 0.020420366898179054, -0.0684463158249855, -0.03883064165711403, 0.02068324200809002, -0.02192079834640026, 0.007481043692678213, 0.0722149983048439, -0.0170309916138649, 0.03462158888578415, 0.05991724506020546, -0.05771838501095772, 0.03184368833899498, 0.02097228169441223, -0.08096352964639664, 0.04008440300822258, 0.058173272758722305, 0.01730845309793949, -0.006920848973095417, -3.64570666988584e-8, -0.056358691304922104, -0.029416723176836967, -0.027461471036076546, -0.03191265091300011, 0.08705286681652069, 0.013405581936240196, -0.03793695569038391, 0.006455315742641687, -0.025104882195591927, -0.018819594755768776, 0.02639608457684517, 0.02192097343504429, -0.05648348852992058, -0.10407140851020813, -0.014249229803681374, -0.05604245513677597, -0.04124926030635834, 0.02390054427087307, -0.009326974861323833, -0.030112000182271004, -0.0007780277519486845, -0.05258658900856972, 0.057069625705480576, 0.05386176332831383, -0.02743474580347538, 0.05561333894729614, 0.01599282957613468, 0.030247559770941734, 0.008838322944939137, -0.05114840716123581, -0.03407760336995125, 0.03991641849279404, 0.038781579583883286, -0.04663912206888199, -0.03213416412472725, 0.0147120151668787, 0.05397624149918556, 0.038790881633758545, -0.02846745401620865, -0.023732559755444527, -0.017136095091700554, -0.006136659532785416, 0.0233622957020998, 0.08035901933908463, 0.0010980635415762663, -0.0379205085337162, -0.038132231682538986, -0.007918090559542179, -0.04197273030877113, -0.09705792367458344, -0.016317078843712807, -0.13148470222949982, 0.037953250110149384, 0.007442064583301544, -0.10090161859989166, 0.03556915372610092, 0.10596734285354614, 0.03762228414416313, -0.06271354854106903, -0.02801300771534443, 0.02925080619752407, 0.02939075045287609, 0.05324272811412811, 0.009805440902709961 ]

{ "pdf_file": "AXTUGHLO4R73GWXQ7YYSTQGN5OI4ZWBC.pdf", "text": "Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 121 Filed 07/03/00 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 121 Filed 07/03/00 Page 2 of 2" }

[ -0.05416286736726761, -0.02588898316025734, -0.015021760016679764, 0.10519827157258987, -0.055707767605781555, 0.09717397391796112, -0.06897877156734467, 0.03549790754914284, -0.06663286685943604, -0.00023453743779100478, 0.06781157106161118, 0.012124166823923588, 0.01707667112350464, 0.08361978828907013, 0.008713653311133385, -0.014889422804117203, 0.09046778082847595, 0.03362228721380234, -0.05505429208278656, -0.04393231123685837, -0.0003791811177507043, 0.0336107462644577, -0.020279837772250175, 0.02391483634710312, -0.013009588234126568, 0.01831659860908985, -0.005369802471250296, -0.09161677956581116, 0.03842080011963844, 0.056505974382162094, -0.007712983060628176, -0.06929799169301987, -0.02240787260234356, 0.0016647611046209931, 0.028167011216282845, 0.07151427865028381, 0.050884705036878586, 0.08654846251010895, 0.021716030314564705, -0.01078122854232788, -0.10104472935199738, 0.00554583640769124, -0.06599905341863632, -0.0637941062450409, -0.07591525465250015, -0.0663156509399414, -0.052544042468070984, -0.1268487423658371, -0.05648229643702507, -0.07223854959011078, 0.07726875692605972, -0.031095921993255615, 0.08095448464155197, 0.016194473952054977, -0.057954635471105576, 0.026994401589035988, -0.02005447819828987, -0.010183325037360191, -0.0066001564264297485, -0.022124048322439194, -0.05365694314241409, 0.005360460374504328, -0.03630645200610161, -0.018095530569553375, -0.01557851117104292, -0.028881514444947243, -0.044128648936748505, 0.02054230310022831, 0.07181079685688019, -0.08835563063621521, -0.06542713195085526, 0.032813429832458496, 0.031311020255088806, 0.02785138227045536, 0.10392603278160095, 0.05220482125878334, 0.060838036239147186, 0.06216732785105705, 0.1221277043223381, -0.11566172540187836, -0.007124045398086309, 0.03720962628722191, 0.028020141646265984, -0.02164895460009575, 0.0004124203114770353, 0.02748449146747589, -0.029283536598086357, 0.023429857566952705, 0.005389062222093344, -0.011154199950397015, -0.0007058625342324376, 0.04928351566195488, -0.06066663935780525, -0.034554947167634964, 0.07075373083353043, -0.0326090045273304, 0.0036809330340474844, -0.021334892138838768, 0.012920137494802475, 0.006451672408729792, -0.006599111948162317, 0.01307764183729887, 0.037531014531850815, -0.03973352909088135, -0.0077349524945020676, -0.058226585388183594, -0.00453954515978694, -0.039127178490161896, -0.019931992515921593, -0.022977285087108612, -0.008412016555666924, -0.09746503084897995, -0.010523541830480099, -0.015845581889152527, -0.0024513837415724993, 0.016297917813062668, 0.02554546855390072, -0.06949042528867722, 0.07260041683912277, -0.025734445080161095, -0.02959696762263775, 0.03456972539424896, 0.07609257102012634, -0.028137000277638435, 0.037638116627931595, 0.0014139863196760416, -0.020429007709026337, 8.43504256765349e-33, 0.019262760877609253, -0.0022308859042823315, -0.06048469617962837, 0.014587679877877235, 0.03551248833537102, 0.0023326734080910683, 0.012569217011332512, 0.0012640570057556033, -0.004991789814084768, -0.0441620834171772, 0.034053876996040344, 0.03354950621724129, 0.056533779948949814, 0.04584519565105438, -0.00945262797176838, -0.016633491963148117, -0.006900894455611706, -0.0005703258793801069, -0.061669036746025085, 0.0390346497297287, 0.021100807934999466, -0.025733502581715584, 0.022259661927819252, 0.03562958538532257, -0.004230738617479801, 0.0332036130130291, 0.02508724108338356, 0.011553253047168255, 0.1158529743552208, 0.005563170183449984, -0.007894094102084637, 0.020809834823012352, -0.08269165456295013, -0.03458819165825844, 0.05803603306412697, 0.004285094793885946, 0.12498292326927185, -0.045593615621328354, -0.015590074472129345, -0.0507052019238472, -0.035828787833452225, -0.024629345163702965, 0.04218972846865654, -0.08504709601402283, 0.06629064679145813, 0.056618012487888336, 0.09522227197885513, -0.052183110266923904, 0.008739638142287731, 0.02582710236310959, -0.024545233696699142, 0.05786260962486267, -0.11489798128604889, -0.1441766917705536, -0.05687564238905907, -0.005327713675796986, -0.013783599250018597, 0.034453585743904114, 0.057378191500902176, -0.09699086099863052, 0.026820773258805275, -0.08075081557035446, -0.02427593246102333, -0.021020764485001564, 0.02971549518406391, -0.051050104200839996, 0.0049754781648516655, -0.015472115948796272, 0.09734614938497543, -0.08546177297830582, -0.052973758429288864, -0.03950421139597893, 0.03353916481137276, 0.05471336096525192, 0.033247098326683044, -0.04233874753117561, 0.04160613566637039, 0.00822476390749216, 0.04565178230404854, -0.041700027883052826, -0.05909610912203789, 0.007478639483451843, -0.012676217593252659, -0.05009237676858902, 0.019747590646147728, -0.07089035212993622, -0.05780418589711189, 0.02015867456793785, 0.026660125702619553, -0.0400683730840683, 0.04138466343283653, 0.03188221529126167, -0.06439726799726486, 0.097692109644413, 0.027125226333737373, -9.342530083960051e-33, 0.084121473133564, 0.05439494922757149, -0.028974642977118492, -0.07285312563180923, 0.07807918637990952, 0.01684068702161312, -0.01619694195687771, -0.07664008438587189, 0.08309952169656754, -0.040787454694509506, 0.005288579035550356, -0.03470468893647194, 0.0183432474732399, -0.01302746869623661, -0.11523035168647766, -0.014261260628700256, -0.07163509726524353, 0.123689666390419, 0.05420221388339996, 0.034251030534505844, 0.0862172320485115, 0.06748846918344498, -0.022168276831507683, 0.016631413251161575, 0.08571933954954147, -0.008779351599514484, -0.02412751503288746, 0.040820006281137466, -0.017586195841431618, 0.05634497478604317, 0.019960876554250717, -0.038956139236688614, 0.02427169866859913, -0.0044349366798996925, -0.08059154450893402, -0.05641258880496025, -0.008331233635544777, 0.018702609464526176, -0.13621681928634644, 0.01952420361340046, 0.06228405237197876, -0.030193282291293144, -0.10793085396289825, 0.0719718486070633, 0.04842134937644005, 0.06386857479810715, -0.01109291147440672, -0.040701981633901596, -0.005233624018728733, 0.049926698207855225, -0.003427905961871147, -0.03626095876097679, 0.04954256862401962, -0.010957279242575169, 0.0235174261033535, 0.008304071612656116, 0.15530937910079956, -0.0668521523475647, -0.09219592809677124, 0.0052657765336334705, 0.046386945992708206, 0.005323322955518961, -0.004117635078728199, 0.016958441585302353, 0.052756063640117645, -0.04529275745153427, -0.06124289706349373, 0.013175505213439465, -0.04058736935257912, -0.005802949424833059, -0.03649859502911568, 0.009015553630888462, 0.04619543254375458, -0.1499197781085968, 0.021847333759069443, 0.03778868913650513, 0.01632438600063324, -0.030504055321216583, -0.0772068053483963, 0.04998674616217613, -0.04796266183257103, -0.06794825196266174, 0.055470772087574005, -0.008644328452646732, 0.061484821140766144, 0.03819733485579491, 0.03793640807271004, 0.012109520845115185, -0.03196807950735092, -0.03517450392246246, -0.035512153059244156, 0.043678462505340576, 0.020918939262628555, 0.04654567688703537, 0.036575958132743835, -6.143332598185225e-8, 0.08277732878923416, 0.02627718262374401, -0.11631813645362854, -0.02871362492442131, 0.04145186394453049, 0.03919314965605736, -0.12682753801345825, -0.012010662816464901, -0.06759262084960938, 0.1074855774641037, -0.03850138932466507, -0.018039964139461517, -0.02045697532594204, -0.02628975920379162, 0.050048716366291046, -0.01230936124920845, 0.024268394336104393, 0.008500407449901104, -0.04059742018580437, 0.04926542937755585, -0.051043715327978134, -0.0057176752015948296, 0.012795121408998966, 0.001691236742772162, -0.002476247027516365, -0.02496379427611828, -0.06699442118406296, 0.030790315940976143, -0.03463108465075493, -0.035265665501356125, 0.03857018053531647, 0.001162069384008646, 0.05909499526023865, -0.004229640122503042, -0.008008131757378578, -0.007641152944415808, -0.021603010594844818, 0.04902837052941322, -0.0338825061917305, 0.029694242402911186, 0.003549580229446292, 0.0008131313370540738, 0.0643855407834053, -0.014142902567982674, 0.07997900247573853, 0.07616075128316879, -0.11983297765254974, -0.01970202475786209, -0.009501442313194275, 0.039861783385276794, -0.07758215069770813, -0.052548639476299286, 0.032445453107357025, -0.04562021419405937, 0.10071699321269989, 0.09717559814453125, -0.02227037586271763, -0.02522880956530571, -0.04403335973620415, 0.05300354212522507, 0.012675716541707516, 0.02351982332766056, -0.013824231922626495, 0.029311364516615868 ]

{ "pdf_file": "AJS2YB2O3ZRHMBI5IKKT2GU3R6H44U4J.pdf", "text": "DOCUMENT RESUME\nED 405 665 EC 303 368\nAUTHOR Freund, MaxineTITLE Inclusion Forum, 1994.INSTITUTION George Washington Univ., Washington, DC. Dept. ofTeacher Preparation and Special Education.SPONS AGENCY Office of Special Education and RehabilitativeServices (ED), Washington, DC.PUB DATE 94CONTRACT H024D10019NOTE 10p.; A product of the Community Integration project.For the 1993 volume, see EC 302 944.PUB TYPE Collected Works Serials (022) ReportsDescriptive (141)JOURNAL CIT Inclusion Forum; v2 n1-2 1994\nEDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Community Programs; *Cooperative Programs;*Disabilities; Early Childhood Education; *InclusiveSchools; *Inservice Teacher Education;*Mainstreaming; Normalization (Disabilities); ParentParticipation; Preschool Education; *SocialIntegration; *Training Methods\nABSTRACT These two newsletter issues focus on trainingstrategies for developing more inclusive programs for children withdisabilities and for developing collaborative programs. An interviewwith Dr. Barbara Wolfe addresses successful inservice teachertraining strategies. Additional information in the first issueincludes guidelines for empowering parents to participate ininclusion training (based on the Partnerships for Inclusion Project,North Carolina) and suggestions for involving-the community, (basedon the Community Connections Project, Washington, D.C.). The secondissue has a brief article on the importance of building a commonvision for successful collaboration, interpersonal skills andcollaboration (based on the Meeting House Cooperative Preschool,Alexandria, Virginia), developing collaborative organizations (basedon the Inclusion through Transdisciplinary Team Project in Idaho),and developing inclusive communities for young children withdisabilities (based on the Welcome Everywhere Project in Indiana).(DB)\n***********************************************************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.***********************************************************************\n Inclusion ForumVol. 2, No. 1Spring/SummerVol. 2, No. 2Fall/Winter1994U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)00(h..is document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating itO Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality.Points of view or opinions stated in this docu-ment do not necessarily represent officialOERI position or policy.\nInclusion ForumDept. of Teacher Preparation andSpecial EducationThe George Washington University2201 G Street, N.W., #524Washington, DC 20052\nBEST COPYMORE\n k, IILILLLCIP/The George Washington University Information Line\nSPRING/SUMMER 1994 VOL. 2, No. 1SPOTLIGHT ON TRAINING STRATEGIESFOLLOW-UP: A KEY COMPONENT OF SUCCESSFUL TRAINING\nDr. Barbara Wolfe, a trainer-of-trainers exemplar,is currently on the faculty of the Department ofSpecial Education at the University of Wiscon-sin-Eau Claire. Prior to university teaching, she spentfifteen years providing inservice training on inclusion toearly childhood professionals. We would like to share someof Barbara's thoughts on training gleaned from a recenttelephone interview.You have conducted research on best practices ininservice education. What did you find most helpedteachers implement new ideas in their classrooms?Factors that most helped teachers use new ideas in theirclassroom were (1) useful handouts/materials, (2) relevantcontent that addressed an existing need. (3) follow-upsupport, (4) practical content that could be applied immedi-ately and (5) an effective trainer.Did any of these findings surprise you?Two were surprisingthe importance of handouts (i.e.practical. relevant handouts) and the impact of the traineron inservice outcomes. Participants defined effectivetrainers as knowledgeable, well prepared, credible, enthusi-astic and able to use a variety of techniques includinghands-on and interactive strategies. The good news aboutthese characteristics is that people can learn themthat is.training isn't an inherent trait but rather a learned skill.Let's talk for a minute about follow-up support. Couldyou define what you mean by follow-up?Broadly speaking, follow-up can be defined as strate-gies and events that take place following the plannedworkshop experience. Some examples are a \"back home\"plan to try on the job, a follow-up class or workshop, on-site coaching by peers or trainers or a follow-up letter withresource articles.Why do you think follow-up is so important ininservice education?Learning is a process, not something that happens in aone-time training event. Change takes place over time andrequires a focused effort for new ideas to be integrated intoongoing practice. Follow-up provides a strategy for focusedeffort over time, thereby increasing the chance that newideas will actually become on-the-job behaviors.What follow-up strategies have you found to be mosteffective?In my research, not too many participants had experi-enced follow-up but those who had preferred (1) observingsomeone else demonstrating the new idea, (2) having on-the-job assistance or (3) participating in small groupdiscussions with fellow staff or an administrator.Two other specific follow-up strategies that can beoffered to participants on a voluntary basis are: (1) coach-ing (peer or expert coaching) which is a labor intensive,one-on-one strategy where the coach serves as a mirrorthrough which the teacher can examine her behavior, and(2) peer support group which brings participants backtogether to talk about the successes they have experiencedand to brainstorm solutions that support implementationefforts.Earlier you spoke of \"back home\" plans as a follow-up strategy. Can you expand on that?A \"back home\" plan is like a personal learning plan. Itis a good strategy for intensive full-day or multi-dayclasses. Each individual completes a plan indicatingpersonal goals, what they will do to accomplish their goals,and possibly, products that will demonstrate accomplish-ment. Trainers can get feedback on the participants'progress toward their goals by doing follow-up visits,calling the site, or requesting video or written records.It is sometimes difficult to motivate participants tocomplete a back home plan after a long training day, so Ihave tried using an \"Aha\" sheet where participants writedown new ideas throughout the session. Then when theymake their plan, I have them limit their ideas to 3 or 4things to try at home. We usually take up to a half-hour atthe end of the training course to develop an individual orteam \"back home\" plan. Carry-over is sometimes increasedby having participants verbally report their plan to someoneelse, or to the whole group. Somehow when you say italoud, you feel more committed to action.Is there anything else you would like to say?Helping teachers learn new skills and incorporate theminto the classroom requires an intensive system of trainingthat utilizes multiple training strategies, including opportu-nities to observe, practice, receive feedback and talk aboutthe ideas. It is paramount that administrators are committedto both the ideas being presented and the training design,which might require an increase in release time for training,planning or peer support.\n3For more information contact:Dr. Barbara WolfeDepartment of Special EducationUniversity of Wisconsin-Eau ClaireEau Claire, WI 54701BEST COPY AVAILABLE\n PAGE 2 INCLUSION FORUM SPRING/SUMMER 1994EMPOWERING PARENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN INCLUSION TRAINING\nArecent NorthCarolina projecttrained parents ofchildren with disabilities toserve as inclusion specialiststhrough41%,, kdevelopingPartnershipsfor Inclusionskills andadvocacyparticipating ininclusion training forday care and other providers of services to children. Thistraining, designed and conducted primarily by experi-enced parent advocates, was funded by the Partnershipsfor Inclusion Project at the Frank Porter Graham ChildDevelopment Center at the University of North CarolinaChapel Hill.The parents participating in the project represented avariety of socio-economic and family backgrounds, hadchildren with different disabilities, and were locatedthroughout the state. The parents agreed to participate ina two-day training session and follow-up activities.Expenses and a small honorarium were given to partici-pants.The training sessions and follow-up activities weredesigned to develop the participants' advocacy andpresentation skills by focusing on the following:a working knowledge of the state's service deliverysystem;the ability to effectively present a personalizedrationale for inclusion;a working knowledge of the basic rights of childrenwith disabilities;the ability to work effectively within the system inadvocating for inclusion.Several of the sessions focused on giving parents avariety of \"tools\" to present their unique perspective oninclusion. Topics included incorporating humor,children's books and artwork, visual images and adulteducation principles to support presentations. Adultlearning principles included giving audiences informa-tion they could use (relevance), showing how theinformation could be used to solve problems (practical-ity) and convincing audiences of the need to learn(motivation).The parents left the two-day training with an \"indi-vidualized education plan\" to help develop their presen-tations. This written plan outlined the presentationpieces that were in place, i.e., the \"strengths,\" and thepieces that needed to be developed, i.e., the \"needs.\" Asfollow up, smaller groups met with one of the parentadvocates. At these sessions, each parent trainee give apresentation. The other trainees and the parent-advocateacted as an audience of professionals who critiqued eachpresentation. This role playing helped prepare thetrainees to present information before live audiences andto answer probing questions. The inclusion specialistsnow serve to link the parents to day care and relatedtraining programs across North Carolina.For more information contact:Ralph C. Worthington, Sandy Steele andKatherine FavrotPartnerships for Inclusion ProjectEast Carolina University4N-66 Brody Medical Sciences BuildingGreenville, NC 27858-4354(919)816-2591GIVING THE HELP THAT TH\nIn 1981, theSocial Integra-tion Program(SIP), which wasadministered at UtahState University,began to servechildren with disabili-ties in community-based child carecenters. Its positiveresults for children,families and providers have led to subsequent projects toassist preschool personnel in serving children withdisabilities. One of the biggest challenges facing com-munity program inclusion efforts is providing the helpthat is needed when it is needed. Although trainingtypically addresses many of the providers' anticipatedneeds, unanticipated needs inevitably arise as servicesare delivered to children and families.To respond to providers' needs in a timely manner,we have found no substitute for \"being there.\" Whensomeone with special expertise in serving children withdisabilities and their families is present on a daily basis,she/he can most easily develop the working relationshipsnecessary to help teams provide effective services.Although on-site support is our preferred form oftechnical assistance, we must often seek alternatives dueto factors such as time and distance. After a goodworking relationship has been established, an itinerantperson can offer assistance using telecommunication\nLi\n VoL. 2, No. 1 INCLUSION FORUM, PAGE 3\nVALUES AND ATTITUDES FIRST\nThe Community Connec-tions Project at TheGeorge WashingtonUniversity recruits and trainsteams of child care providerswho then support the inclusion ofchildren with disabilities in theirprograms. The project is foundedon the belief that all children with disabilities deservethe option of attending community programs with their:non-disabled peers. It is committed to supporting childcare personnel in their collaboration with other serviceproviders to meet the needs of all children in inclusive_re*MMENITYNNECTIONS\nNEED WHEN THEY NEED IT\noptions such as the telephone. For example, duringa weekly phone call to each site, the SIP consultantand provider reviewed each child's progress andtogether sought solutions to problems.But sometimes a picture is needed to establishthe context in which the problem occurs. Twostrategies have proven advantageous in this situa-tion. One is to \"dialogue\" through a videotapeexchange. First, the provider makes a video demon-strating the problem and then the trainer respondsby making a video that demonstrates an alternativepractice. In the Early Ed Project, video exchangehelped providers increase child engagement insmall group activities by demonstrating alternativestrategies for child-adult interactions.Another strategy, interactive television, allowsall parties to see what is happening as well as totalk about it. Using the state's educational televi-sion network, a speech and language pathologist ina television studio watched two children in pre-schools several hundred miles away. She gave theproviders suggestions to stimulate language andthen followed up weekly through videotape ex-change. These alternatives allow us to deliverpersonalized help in a timely manner withoutspending hours traveling from program to program.For more information contact:Sarah RuleCenter for Persons with DisabilitiesUtah State UniversityLogan, UT 84322-6805settings.As training begins, the firstissue addressed is the partici-pants' attitudes and valuesabout disabilities. Addressingattitudes and values first givesparticipants the opportunity totalk about their fears andhopes, Trainees are asked to think about inclusion froma personal perspective by remembering and describing atime in their lives when they wanted to belong and feltexcluded. People describe powerful childhood memoriesabout being ridiculed in kindergarten, being excludedfrom a team, and/or being teased about their ethnicity.Through this exercise they remember the hurt of exclu-sion and they begin to empathize with the feelings ofchildren in their care.Next, participants complete a survey that asks themto rate their responses to a series of statements aboutinclusion such as:\nE3The parents of a child with disabilities should be ableto decide what placement and services their childreceives.O For most children with disabilities inclusion worksonly if there is extra adult help.CI Inclusion is good for children with disabilities but theother children usually do not benefit.Teaching children with disabilities is much harder thanteaching typical children.O Some children would be better off in separate morespecialized settings.The group then discusses the range of responses. Be-cause there are no right or wrong answers, this exercisehelps people clarify their own values and beliefs andshare their thinking with their colleagues. Teaming isvital to the success of inclusion and this exercise alsohelps the trainees understand and respect the values andbeliefs of their team members.By working through this process of examining andexperiencing the power of attitudes and values aboutdisabilities, the teams come to a common core of beliefsabout inclusion. Team members then write a missionstatement that will serve to guide their goals and activi-ties as they plan for inclusion.For more information contact:Y. Rab,Community Connections ProjectThe-George_Washing,tonUniversity-Department of Teacher Preparation and Special -EducationThe Early Intervention Programs2201 G Street N.W., Funger #524Washington. D.C. 20052(202) 994-5592E3\n511:WQT ryrrovxte TTTNv-9\n SPRING/SUMMER 1994 INCLUSION FORUM VOL. 2, No. t\nEarly Childhood Inclusion Training ProgramsMainstreaming Young Children:A Training Series for Child Care ProvidersPat Wesley, Partnerships for InclusionFrank Porter Graham Child Development CenterUniversity of North Carolina300 NationsBank Plaza 137 E. Franklin St. CB8040Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8040(919) 962-7364Special Training for Special NeedsCooperative Education Services Agency:CESA 5Portage ProjectP.O. Box 564Portage, Maine 53901Including All Children: Training forAdministrators and CaregiversAGH Associates, Inc.Box 130Hampton, New Hampshire 03842SpecialCare Curriculum Trainer's Manual: A Resourcefor Training Child CaregiversChild Development ResourcesP. 0. Box 299Lightfoot, VA 23090(804) 565-0303Also Availablerz, 0 .0 t-4PublicationsTraining: The Magazine of Human RCreative Training TechniquesLakewood Publications, Inc.50 South Ninth StreetMinneapolis. MN 55402(800) 328-4329Games Trainers Play: Experiential LeStill More Games Trainers PlayJohn W. Newstromand Edward E. ScannellMcGraw Hill, Inc.New York, New YorkTraining and Development Handbook:A Guide to Human Resource DevelopmentR. L. Craig, EditorMcGraw Hill. Inc.New York. New YorkTraining and Development JournalAmerican Society for Trainingand Development1640 King Street Box 1443Alexandria, VA 22313(703) 683-8126esources Development\narning Exercises\nIf there are issuesand concerns youwould like to seeaddressed in theInclusion Forumwrite to:Inclusive Early Childhood Education: A Model ClassroomMarie Abraham. Lori Morris, & Penelope WaldCommunication Skill Builders3830 E. Bellevue; P. 0. Box 42050-E 93Tucson, AZ 85733; Phone: (602) 323-7500Published by theCommunity. Integration ProjectPrincipal Investigator .... Maxine FreundDirectorPenny WaldStaff.............Marie Abraham.......-. Lori MorrisCatherine LethbridgeNewsletter Designer....... Tommye GeilEditorial AdvisorBruce KauffmannInclusion Forum is published semi-annually.(4))leBUiVA.'4.1.LLDept. of Teacher Preparation and Special EducationThe George Washington University2201 G Street, N.W., #524Washington, D.C. 20052\nBEST COPY AVAILABLEIf youwould liketo be a part oftheInclusion Forumbycontributing information orserving as a resource to otherprograms, please send a briefprogram description alongwith a contact name& telephone numberto:.. _\nInclusion Forumdo Penny WaldDept. of Teacher Preparation& Special EducationThe George Washington University2201 G Street., NW, #524Washington, DC 20052(703) 836-0723The Community Integration Project (CIP), a federally fundedoutreach project sponsored by The George WashingtonUniversity, supports the inclusion of children with disabilitiesin early childhood programs. CIP assists LEAs and earlychildhood programs in combining resources and acquiringskills essential to quality inclusion.This newsletter was developed under grant number H024D10019 with theOffice of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services. U.S. Department ofEducation (OSERS/DOE). The content, however, does not necessarily reflectthe position or policy of OSERS/DOE, and no official endorsement of thesematerials should be inferred.\nNon-profit Org.U.S. PostagePaidWashington, DCPermit No. 593\n CIP/The George Washington University Information LineFALL/WINTER 1994 Vol.. 2, No. 2SPOTLIGHT ON COLLABORATIONBUILDING A VISION FOR COLLABORATIONAs communities strive to increase inclusiveoptions in early childhood education, the needto pull together fragmented systems has raisednew issues for planners and practitioners. Rejoining afragmented system is not an easy task. Typically, acommunity may begin by establishing an interagencygroup with the mission of coordinating services tofamilies. This type of cooperative initiative simplycoordinates existing services and offers a reasonablestarting point for change. However, in localities wherethe need and intent is to fundamentally change the waysservices are designed and delivered, acollaborative strategy will be necessary(Melaville and Blank, 1991). Whether apartnership will be collaborative or coopera-tive in nature depends on \"how far partnerswish to move beyond the status quo\"(Melaville and Blank, 1991).The existence of a common goal orvision supports the notion of fundamentalchange and is a defining feature of a truecollaboration. A shared vision requiresthat collaborating parties express their personal beliefsand build consensus around the issue they wish toaddress. Participants in this process are challenged totranscend their traditional roles and answer the question\"What do we want to create?\" rather than \"What do wethink we can do?\". As service delivery barriers arebroken down, there is an opportunity to create aninclusive vision and to have a collaboration where thewhole becomes greater than the sum of the parts. Senge(1990) in his book The Fifth Discipline, states that ashared vision can \"create the spark, the excitement thatlifts an organization out of the mundane, . .. compelcourage so naturally that people don't even realize theextent of their courage. . .foster risk taking andexperimentation.\"Collaboration may not always start with a clearvision, but rather begin with a sense that somethingneeds to happen differently. The vision may not beclearly articulated for some time. Vandercook, Yorkand Sullivan (1993) warn that engaging in a long-termcommitment without taking the time to build relation-ships can be futile. Collaborations are fostered byencouraging participants to work together on smallprojects: offering opportunities to share philosophies,learning to communicate effectively and experiencingsmall successes. Collaboration is basically a people-to-people process. It is essential to create strong bonds andmutual respect between the collaborative partners as afirst step in building a shared vision.Creating a meaningful vision is an exciting andchallenging task. To effectively sustain the commitmentof the collaborative partners to change, a shared visionmust include the deeply personal visions of eachparticipant as well as mutually held beliefs. When thishappens, a vision will be seen as both \"my vision\" and\"our vision\" (Senge, 1990). Rowe (1992), developer of avision-driven, decision-making model for schoolrestructunng, suggests that change requires visions that(1) are compelling, (2) are clear and (3) can be assessed.\"We will send a man to the moon in this decade\" is aclassic statement of a vision that exemplifiesthese criteria. So too are the visions \"allchildren can learn\" or \"all children can learnin school environments that are fullyinclusive.\" Shared vision statementssuch as these can change the way aschool system does business.Collaboration is a process: it is not an end in itself.A collaborative effort will look different each time it isimplemented. A specific model of collaboration cannotbe \"parachuted\" into a state, community or classroom. Itmust be responsive to the culture of each new location(Blank and Lombardi, 1991). Collaborations arerelationship-oriented and like all lasting relationshipstake time to develop.Lori M. MorrisCatherine LethbridgeCommunity Integration ProjectThe George - Washington. UniversitySenge, P.M. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: the art and practice of the learningorganization. New York: Doubleday/CurrencyBlank, M.J.. and Lombardi, J. 1991 Towards improved services for childrenand families: forging new relationships through collaboration. WhitePlains, New York: A.L. Mailman FoundationVandercook, T York, J. and Sullivan. B. 1993. True or false? Trulycollaborative relationships can exist between university and public schoolpersonnel. OSERS News In Print. Washington, D.C.: United StatesDepartment of EducationMelaville. A. and Blank, M. 1991. What it rakes: structuring interagencypartnerships to connect children and families with comprehensive services.Washington. D.C.: Education and Human Services ConsortiumRowe. L. 1992. ODOM - A Process for Change. Journal of the National7 Center for Outcome Based Education. Vol. 1 No.5REST COPY AVAILABLE\n PAGE 2 INCLUSION FORUM FALL/WINTER 1994COLLABORATION:An Interpersonal Effort\nMeeting House Cooperative Preschool is aprivate community preschool in Alexandria,Virginia. Since 1991, the school, incollaboration with the Alexandria City Public Schools,has offered inclusive placements for children withdisabilities. These children and their teachers areprovided support by a special educator from theschool system, who is on site at least two days perweek. Partnerships between the regular and specialeducators require a variety of skills. In particular,three interpersonal skills have facilitatedcollaboration: communication, flexibility andsupport.Building rapport is an essential first step inestablishing good communication. At Meeting House,initial meetings between the regular and specialeducators focused on sharing vital information (e.g.,curriculum, IEPs) and clarifying expectations.Occasionally forms (e.g., role exchange form) wereused to expedite these discussions. In addition, teammembers worked to develop a personal relationship.Limited free time was used to engage in casualconversations about ideas and concerns, helping tostrengthen rapport.Teamwork requires flexibility in both principlesand practices. Regular and special educators oftenview issues that arise in inclusive programs fromdistinct perspectives. Being willing to reflect ondifferences and remain open to adapting one'spractices helps to create a team approach. In oneMeeting House class, a child with disabilities washaving extreme difficulty during circle time. While theclassroom teacher did not want this child to beseparated, she agreed to the special educator's plan topull the child out of circle time. The time was used tofacilitate skills the child needed to participate in grouptime and eventually he was able to join in circle time.Support among team members is a basicingredient in successful collaborations. When thereare problems to be solved, they are tackled togetherwith each member contributing ideas and resources. Inorder to recognize problems as well as progress, goalsmust be defined. Goals may reflect objectives forchildren or next steps necessary for teamdevelopment. With goals firmly in mind, thechallenges can be identified and addressed, and thesmall steps made toward improvement can beperceived and acknowledged.8Establishing communication, remaining flexible andbeing supportive enabled the Meeting House staff to createa shared vision and meet the challenges the inclusionprogram presents.For more information contact:Joan Wheeler & Beth FedmanMeeting House Cooperative Preschool316 South Royal StreetAlexandria, VA 22314DEVELOPING COLLA:.To Promote Inc\ncommunity teamsThe Inclusion throughTransdisciplinary Teamproject (ITT) at theUniversity of Idaho providestechnical assistance tocommunities of professionalsand parents who strive topromote inclusive lives forall young children. Examplesofinclude InteragencyCouncil Committees, Head Startregional offices, and state departmentsof education. ITT's organizationalapproach to inclusion emphasizes thecollaboration of persons representingdifferent disciplines. A majorcharacteristic of these teams is thewide range of perspectives towardinclusion by its members.Working with a diverse group ofpersons presents both opportunitiesand challenges. Collaborative effortsare more effective than individualefforts. However, members' resistanceto change often impedescollaboration. Commonly encounteredsources of resistance and strategies forovercoming them are listed in Figure1 at right.We often facilitate team collaboration by havingmembers learn and appreciate each other's views.Nonproductive arguing endangers relationships. Byhelping people to understand other perspectives, weremove sources of argument. We do this through a five-step process.Source Of ResistanceNo .perceived benefit\nFear of incapability\nAnxiety over uncertainoutcomes\nFear of budget loss orsalary changeFear of lostresponsibility orauthority\nBEST COPY AVAILABLE\n VOL. 2, No. 2 INCLUSION FORUM PAGE 3WELCOME EVERYWHERE:Inclusive Communities for Young Children\nWelcome Everywhere: Inclusive Communities forYoung Children with Disabilities is a projectdesigned to facilitate collaborative relationshipsand networks that result in inclusive programs and activitiesthroughout communities. The Welcome Everywhere projectsupports building local capacity for inclusion through (1)administrative commitment, (2) involvement of a variety ofstakeholders and (3) the availability of training and technicalassistance. The project is conducted by the Center forORATIVEORGANIZATIONSlusive Communities\nPrepare for developing the team: Members learn as much aspossible about each other, including their perceptions. Ways todo this include assuming each others' positions; activelistening exercises; role playing; and sharing perceivedstrengths, weaknesses, opportunities and barriers in regard toefforts toward inclusion.Set the tone for the team: Identify interests common to allmembers through focus groups.Define the team's purpose: Focus on common interests andmutual concerns, not solutions. One wayto do this is by developing a missionstatement.Generate options: Create several optionswhile avoiding obstacles such as prematurejudgment or belief in a single solution. Atthis time, goals should be formalized andprioritized.Evaluate options and reach consensus:Establish criteria for making decisions andinitiate development of action plans.We view team operations as a series ofsequences that occur within the contexts ofteam development and crisis response.These are (1) team formation, (2) storming(exploring different perspectives), (3) settingteam behavior norms, and (4) performance.Finally, we believe that some conflict isgood, as it helps to facilitate team action.For more information contact:Jennifer Olson, Ph.D.Inclusion through Transdisciplinary TeamingIdaho Center on Developmental Disabilities129 West Third StreetUniversity of IdahoMoscow, ID 83843(208) 885-6605StrategiesIncrease knowledgeInvolve in planningOffer financial supportOffer trainingBuild on strengthsUse active listeningExpose to other successfulinclusive communitiesInvolve in planningInsure financial supportAdjust role expectationsEmphasize positiveaspeCts of changeFigure 1\nBEST COPYAVAILABLEInnovative Practices for Young Children at the UniversityAffiliated Program of Indiana.A major goal of the project is to promote inclusion ineducation and non-education settings throughout acommunity. This goal has prompted a unique aspect of theprojectthe establishment of local Inclusion Networks.An Inclusion Network is comprised of citizens represent-ing a variety of organizations reflecting each community'sunique strengths and resources. Network membershipusually includes parents, educators, health professionals,social service providers, clergy, business persons and localgovernment officials. The Inclusion Network meets over aperiod of twelve to eighteen months (four or five meet-ings) to carry out the following project-related activities:the development of a Community Vision Statementthe identification of Issues and Barriers to inclusionthe development of Action Plans to address issues andbarriersthe identification of agencies and individuals to receiveInclusion Network informationSpecific formats, tailored to individual communities, arefollowed to facilitate the activities.The success of the Inclusion Networks has beenattributed to several factors, including the opportunity towork with a broad coalition of community members; theopportunity to consider new and different ways to addressissues and barriers; and productive, fast paced meetings.As one participant noted, \"It is a unique opportunity toexpand views and promote change-attitudes about childrenwith disabilities and their families can be dramaticallyaltered and gaps can be filled. [It provided] a much neededforum for awareness.\"The function and outcomes of Inclusion Networksdiffer from formal networks such as local interagencycoordinating councils. By combining existing localassociations and informal/formal networks associated withearly childhood special education programs and agencies,Inclusion Networks have established and promotedinclusive practices across communities. The activities ofeach Network seem to have a ripple effect. Membersindicate they share information with other people in thecommunity. Those members, representing businesses andcommunity organizations, have reported changes made intheir practices to ensure the inclusion of children withdisabilities and their families.For more information contact:Georgia SheriffCenter for Innovative Practices for Young ChildrenInstitute for Study of Developmental Disabilities2853 E. 10th StreetBloomington, IN 47408(812) 855-65089\n FAu./WirrrEn 1994 INCLUSION FORUM VOL. 2, No. 2'unelinTraining ModelsBest Practices in Integration (BPI) Inservice Training ModelSusan M. KleinDepartment of Curriculum and InstructionIndiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405-1006(812) 856-8167Partnerships in Early Intervention: A Training Guide on Family-Centered Care Team Building and Service CoordinationWaisman Center Early Intervention Programs1500 Highland Avenue, Room 231, Madison, WI 53705(608) 263-5022VideosThe Business of ParadigmsJoel BarkerChart House Learning Corporation221 River Ridge Circle, Burnsville, MN 55337Available through Inclusion through Transdisciplinary Teaming:Stages of Group Development (1994)Teaming (1994)Resistance to Change (1994)Jennifer OlsonIdaho Center on Developmental DisabilitiesUniversity of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843(208) 885-6849Also AvailableInclusive Early Childhood Education: A Model ClassroomMarie Abraham, Lori Morris, & Penelope WaldCommunication Skill Builders3830 E. Bellevue; P. 0. Box 42050-E 93Tucson. AZ 85733; Phone: (602) 323-7500Publiehed by theCmunIty Integration ProjectPrincipal Investigator .... Maxine FreundDirectorPenny WaldStaff..Marie Abraham\n.Lori Morris---...Catherine LethbridgeNewsletter DeSigner.........-.Tommye GeilEditorial Advisor ----Bruce KauffmanInclusion ForuMis published semi-annually.. _\nUailitro7Z6141L.V.ALLLIIDept. of Teacher Preparation and Special EducationThe George Washington University2201 G Street, N.W., #524Washington, D.C. 20052PublicationsA Community Approach to an Integrated Service System for Childrenwith Special Needs (1988)R. Hazel. P. Barber, S. Roberts, S. Behr, E. Helmstetter, and D. GuessBaltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company(800) 638-2775The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization(1990) Peter M. SengeNew York: DoubledayThe Seven Habits of Highly Effective People(1989) Stephen R. CoveyNew York: FiresideSimon and SchusterTogether We Can: A Guide for Crafting AEducation and Human Services (1993)A. I. Melaville, M. Blank, & G. AsayeshU. S. Government Printing OfficeSuperintendent of DocumentsMail Stop: SSOPWashington, DC 20402-9328\nIf there are issuesand concerns youwould like to seeaddressed in theInclusion Forumwrite to:Profamily System ofIf youwould liketo be a part of theInclusion Forum bycontributing information orserving as a resource to otherprograms, please send a briefprogram description alongwith a contact name&telephone numberto:\nInclusion Forumdo Penny WaldDept. of Teacher Preparation& Special EducationThe George Washington University2201 G Street., NW, #524Washington, DC 20052(703) 836-0723\nThis newsletter was developed under grant number H024D10019 with theOffice of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services, U.S. Department ofEducation (OSERS/DOE). The content, however, does not necessarily reflectthe position or policy of OSERS/DOE, and no official endorsement of thesematerials should be inferred.\n10Non-profit Org.U.S. PostagePaidWashington, DCPermit No. 593\nBEST COPYAVAILABLE\n (9/92)U.S. DEPARTMENT OFEDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OEM)Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)\nNOTICE\nREPRODUCTION BASIS1ERICI\nThis document is covered by a signed \"Reproduction Release(Blanket)\" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documentsfrom its source organizationand, therefore,does not require a \"SpecificDocument\" Release form.\nThis document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Releaseform (either \"Specific Document\" or \"Blanket\").\n" }

[ -0.056336335837841034, 0.010820891708135605, 0.059033989906311035, 0.019789014011621475, -0.021583717316389084, -0.022847695276141167, -0.08171394467353821, 0.07343573868274689, -0.01750541478395462, -0.017286797985434532, -0.063181072473526, -0.16495902836322784, 0.02048615738749504, 0.010961984284222126, -0.04424463212490082, 0.039593346416950226, -0.04311870038509369, -0.07065114378929138, -0.0054537770338356495, 0.047437068074941635, 0.023795392364263535, 0.04468454420566559, -0.05734381079673767, -0.004635089077055454, -0.03294261172413826, 0.022092310711741447, -0.0656823217868805, -0.013575933873653412, 0.010022188536822796, 0.012377509847283363, 0.0034934228751808405, 0.05673125013709068, -0.002667138585820794, -0.05092183127999306, 0.1311383843421936, -0.014794841408729553, 0.0455448254942894, 0.0011357213370501995, -0.03438444063067436, 0.06683379411697388, -0.06550925225019455, -0.0019579161889851093, 0.06566140055656433, 0.07392925024032593, -0.01036004163324833, 0.039677973836660385, -0.042722273617982864, -0.058940496295690536, -0.05157427117228508, 0.06191498041152954, 0.019917039200663567, 0.03521249443292618, -0.02581358142197132, 0.07255665957927704, -0.05994505435228348, -0.07364419847726822, -0.018722137436270714, -0.08733894675970078, 0.032166168093681335, 0.048074111342430115, -0.023580748587846756, -0.00663977162912488, -0.028801510110497475, -0.05276753753423691, 0.029079360887408257, 0.011663124896585941, -0.08712874352931976, -0.04052725434303284, -0.04045186936855316, -0.05664042755961418, -0.05052122473716736, 0.03426969051361084, 0.046795204281806946, -0.05408710613846779, -0.08630996197462082, -0.040446702390909195, -0.010714870877563953, 0.016201892867684364, 0.09700364619493484, -0.12668873369693756, -0.0031255497597157955, 0.019481169059872627, 0.0008610261720605195, -0.032849106937646866, -0.028734544292092323, -0.011992571875452995, 0.03803698718547821, 0.020838603377342224, -0.026364466175436974, 0.038243114948272705, 0.0025382668245583773, 0.0001304279430769384, -0.06348112225532532, 0.02932652458548546, 0.0691930428147316, 0.03361912816762924, 0.029590066522359848, -0.06453274935483932, 0.025029754266142845, -0.011057460680603981, 0.009970751591026783, 0.0032682144083082676, -0.0887540727853775, -0.0157065037637949, -0.029591474682092667, -0.025122351944446564, -0.011437459848821163, 0.1058269664645195, 0.0547688752412796, -0.014021990820765495, 0.008797870948910713, -0.013666048645973206, -0.00940756406635046, -0.0022290085908025503, 0.0038151005282998085, 0.044362135231494904, 0.03542790561914444, -0.03893914818763733, -0.05212302505970001, -0.04669306054711342, -0.03467627614736557, -0.07690425962209702, 0.01688266731798649, 0.0017131781205534935, 0.04834786430001259, 0.0005014131311327219, 0.05810873210430145, 6.451100507685236e-33, 0.08926472812891006, -0.028068872168660164, -0.012384513393044472, -0.0027576249558478594, 0.0010522365337237716, -0.02723061479628086, 0.0042017740197479725, 0.011322999373078346, 0.023879919201135635, 0.04453929886221886, -0.03419504314661026, 0.10286399722099304, -0.09745237976312637, 0.012784059159457684, -0.05107086896896362, -0.0011150069767609239, 0.033909812569618225, -0.01886330358684063, -0.07999774813652039, -0.026214411482214928, 0.03878600150346756, -0.15791134536266327, 0.006217437330633402, 0.05116214230656624, 0.051697585731744766, 0.0004954313044436276, -0.03311523422598839, 0.06721365451812744, -0.11391699314117432, -0.011779903434216976, 0.08678438514471054, -0.03836716711521149, -0.032450120896101, -0.026566166430711746, 0.08232299983501434, -0.035715486854314804, 0.1501721739768982, 0.08916624635457993, -0.022552939131855965, 0.05711749196052551, 0.09273969382047653, 0.01486380584537983, 0.1168641746044159, -0.007641068659722805, 0.052872732281684875, -0.07228612154722214, -0.011124011129140854, 0.015095547772943974, 0.06681844592094421, 0.06683586537837982, -0.10358694940805435, 0.0441911444067955, -0.07451068609952927, -0.037363000214099884, 0.04579831287264824, 0.03276076167821884, -0.03085615113377571, -0.03473757952451706, -0.009930620901286602, 0.019773313775658607, -0.04880690947175026, 0.08011028915643692, -0.0809878557920456, -0.057339299470186234, -0.02355724386870861, 0.015440757386386395, 0.06092462316155434, 0.047570861876010895, 0.0629507526755333, -0.061812784522771835, -0.031087014824151993, -0.05449501797556877, 0.048298683017492294, 0.06389080733060837, -0.03232423961162567, -0.006722451187670231, 0.022350450977683067, 0.08316033333539963, 0.03766423836350441, 0.03460954874753952, 0.008520655333995819, -0.004027220886200666, 0.05022798851132393, -0.015476229600608349, -0.02822808548808098, -0.0311292614787817, 0.005844993982464075, -0.08442845195531845, -0.03651215136051178, -0.014407051727175713, -0.04080472141504288, 0.004905418027192354, 0.025226237252354622, -0.09575721621513367, -0.07143495976924896, -6.658113879072672e-33, 0.01230676844716072, 0.043433256447315216, -0.02701549232006073, -0.013957737013697624, 0.010528349317610264, -0.024628451094031334, 0.0846782922744751, -0.04604238271713257, 0.08407508581876755, -0.034764133393764496, -0.02810445986688137, 0.08508750796318054, -0.009084118530154228, -0.02690022438764572, -0.000912778836209327, 0.04194840043783188, -0.06006626412272453, -0.023608464747667313, -0.07258111238479614, -0.0450289286673069, 0.004479255992919207, -0.0031361228320747614, -0.05501709505915642, 0.020898230373859406, -0.005704842507839203, 0.06433060020208359, 0.035539548844099045, -0.040042031556367874, 0.003966787829995155, -0.027235103771090508, -0.04538113251328468, 0.004020432010293007, 0.03522321209311485, 0.010178761556744576, -0.05988677591085434, -0.1364489197731018, 0.07814177870750427, -0.037130795419216156, -0.08252676576375961, 0.0513097383081913, 0.0685783326625824, 0.021431608125567436, -0.0018880149582400918, -0.026141125708818436, -0.0671304315328598, 0.05378616601228714, 0.011463513597846031, -0.0505245141685009, 0.03459196165204048, 0.05689440295100212, -0.005681589245796204, 0.007442053407430649, -0.037405479699373245, 0.09289148449897766, -0.02456720545887947, -0.00973668321967125, 0.04624480381608009, 0.04118376597762108, -0.1092054694890976, 0.027583982795476913, 0.09933746606111526, 0.045015837997198105, -0.030812181532382965, 0.0008951711934059858, 0.02900988794863224, 0.06851499527692795, -0.024085380136966705, -0.019140467047691345, 0.05880941450595856, 0.0029228003695607185, -0.05234842002391815, -0.08446228504180908, 0.08415119349956512, -0.16612371802330017, -0.019737569615244865, -0.026370307430624962, -0.03291816636919975, 0.006156633608043194, 0.0058854431845247746, 0.013884585350751877, 0.06410691887140274, 0.04440421983599663, -0.032366786152124405, 0.03404225409030914, 0.05085913464426994, -0.009481018409132957, 0.04130071774125099, -0.08095789700746536, 0.04241076111793518, 0.05445599555969238, -0.07724730670452118, -0.01604241132736206, -0.14549514651298523, -0.006078869104385376, 0.03218681737780571, -5.578107931114573e-8, -0.012375438585877419, -0.009316036477684975, -0.007965454831719398, 0.04615658149123192, -0.006933501921594143, 0.009562833234667778, 0.05149343982338905, 0.032348740845918655, -0.0028474824503064156, 0.0008500980911776423, -0.017696525901556015, 0.0025486513040959835, -0.05494258552789688, -0.062025297433137894, 0.08613137900829315, -0.06340517103672028, 0.05217212811112404, -0.00043251438182778656, -0.0575963631272316, 0.011841705068945885, -0.00034813338425010443, 0.024365568533539772, 0.02575942873954773, 0.035804446786642075, 0.027924690395593643, -0.019673388451337814, -0.01737353391945362, 0.029643084853887558, 0.05103343725204468, 0.04861697182059288, 0.055451955646276474, 0.05426887050271034, -0.0025897191371768713, -0.036173395812511444, 0.06777548789978027, 0.008725758641958237, -0.049553319811820984, 0.053522419184446335, -0.0574706494808197, 0.11006094515323639, -0.040202490985393524, 0.07148205488920212, -0.06433330476284027, 0.029012491926550865, 0.05979182943701744, 0.004507002886384726, -0.07511657476425171, 0.05188596248626709, 0.06326406449079514, -0.01972007192671299, 0.03957568109035492, -0.01170251052826643, -0.03300828859210014, 0.036674730479717255, 0.00927800964564085, 0.12994669377803802, -0.0036856634542346, -0.026251668110489845, -0.08859435468912125, 0.029807543382048607, 0.044082511216402054, 0.018316732719540596, -0.0027874570805579424, -0.05062653869390488 ]

{ "pdf_file": "4CWINULHRRVWF33LXZE4U5EEHETC2SI6.pdf", "text": "California Regional Water Quality Control Board \nNorth Coast Region \nMonitoring and Reporting Program No. R1-2003-0051 \n(Revised December 18,2003) \nfor \nSouthern Humboldt Unified School District \n' Whitethorn Elementary School \n1685 1 Briceland-Thorn Road \nWhitethorn, CA \nHumboldt County \nMONITORING \n1. The presence of floating product shall be evaluated in each monitoring well quarterly. If \ndetected, the thickness shall be measured to at least 0.01 foot increments. \n2. The depth to groundwater in all monitoring wells shall be determined to at least 0.01 foot \nincrements quarterly. The results of each quarter's elevation shall be reported in tabular \nform indicating the surveyed elevations of each well reference point, depth to groundwater \nfrom referencipoint, and the actual groundwater elevation. he data generated from the \nelevation readings must be referenced to mean sea level. \n3. Monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2, MW-3, MW-5, MW-7 MW-8, MW-10, MW-11, MW-22 \nshall be sampled quarterly. The analyses shall be performed at a laboratory certified by the \nDepartment of Health Services. All groundwater samples shall be analyzed for: \nTotal petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel \nBTEX \nParameters measured in the field shall include temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, \noxidatiodreduction potential and conductivity. \n4. All remaining wells and school water supply shall be sampled annually (Third Quarter of \neach year) as described for wells on the quarterly monitoring program. During quarterly \nmonitoring, wells on annual monitoring program shall be measured for groundwater \nelevation and dissolved oxygen. \nREPORTING \nReports shall include: \ngroundwater elevation contour maps; \ndirection of the groundwater gradient; \nlocations of wells monitored; \nconstituents and analytical results; \nchain of custody documents showing the: time and date of the sample collected, name \nof the person collecting the samples; \nsigned laboratory sheets including quality control data and explanations of analytical \nanomalies, if any. These supporting documents may be included as appendices to the \nreport; \ninterpretations of the data; \nand a tabular summary of past analytical results. Monitoring and Reporting \nProgra~n No. R1-2003-005 1 Revised Decolnber 18, 2003 \nQuarterly monitoring reports shall be submitted to this office in accordance with the following \nschedule: \nreport in^ Period Due Date \nJanuary, February, March April 30 \nApril, May, June July 30 \nJuly, August, September October 30 \nOctober, November, December January 30 \nMonitoring data shall also be submitted electronically to the State Water Resources Control \nBoard's Geographic Environmental Information Management System database (GeoTracker) as \nrequired by Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 16, Article 12 of the California Code of Regulations \n(i.e., AB2886 electronic reporting requirements). \nDecember 18,2003 California Regional Water Quality Control Board \nNorth Coast Region \nMonitoring and Reporting Program No. R1-2003-0051 \nfor \nSouthern Humboldt Unified School District \nWhitethorn Elementary School \n1685 1 Briceland-Thorn Road \nWhitethorn, CA \nHumboldt County \nMONITORING \n1. The presence of floating product shall be evaluated in each monitoring well quarterly. If \ndetected, the thickness shall be measured to at least 0.01 foot increments. \n2. The depth to groundwater in all monitoring wells shall be determined to at least 0.01 foot \nincrements quarterly. The results of each quarter's elevation shall be reported in tabular \nform indicating the surveyed elevations of each well reference point, depth to groundwater \nfrom reference point, and the actual groundwater elevation. The data generated from the \nelevatiori readings must be referenced to mean sea level. \n3. All monitoring wells shall be sampled quarterly. The analyses shall be performed at a \ncertified laboratory for total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel, benzene, toluene, \nethylbenzene and xylene. Parameters measured in the field shall include temperature, \ndissolved oxygen, dissolved carbon dioxide, pH, oxidatiodreduction potential and \nconductivity. \nREPORTING \nReports shall include groundwater elevation contour maps, direction of the groundwater gradient \nand locations of wells monitored, signed laboratory sheets, interpretations of the data, and a \ntabular summary of past analytical results. Quarterly monitoring reports, including quarterly \ngradient information and quarterly sampling data, shall be submitted to this office in accordance \nwith the following schedule: \nReporting Period \nJanuary, February, March \nApril, May, June \nJuly, August, September \nOctober, November, December \nOrdered by (3p--d-- Due Date \nApril 30 \nJuly 30 \nOctober 30 \nJanuary 30 \nSusan A. Warner \nExecutive Officer \nMarch 28,2003 " }

[ -0.10157409310340881, -0.019689815118908882, 0.008980299346148968, -0.01982070505619049, -0.000209632285987027, 0.07921954989433289, 0.03394167125225067, 0.0370568186044693, -0.03328454867005348, 0.009104697033762932, -0.006351354997605085, 0.16183604300022125, 0.043375298380851746, -0.007649561390280724, -0.028275422751903534, 0.030674416571855545, 0.046061836183071136, -0.00212423806078732, -0.005809491034597158, 0.16105130314826965, 0.002863152651116252, 0.06773806363344193, 0.028980959206819534, 0.07290399819612503, -0.08358648419380188, 0.036187805235385895, -0.0610533282160759, -0.04295435547828674, -0.02409583330154419, 0.02300107851624489, 0.043113287538290024, 0.027763741090893745, 0.007502811960875988, 0.008682125248014927, 0.05970832705497742, -0.02458154782652855, -0.010492656379938126, 0.0817452073097229, 0.005607245955616236, 0.04388954117894173, 0.02760225161910057, -0.08395170420408249, -0.049361664801836014, 0.09731587767601013, 0.04608834907412529, -0.07183153927326202, -0.01715174689888954, 0.002989061875268817, 0.05019625648856163, 0.09156369417905807, -0.07524717599153519, 0.003022948279976845, 0.030289743095636368, 0.008222881704568863, 0.02116219885647297, -0.07903345674276352, 0.02317255735397339, -0.024306153878569603, -0.0760236382484436, 0.054530251771211624, -0.044125355780124664, -0.010173512622714043, 0.02583715319633484, 0.025369247421622276, -0.05410345643758774, 0.117006316781044, -0.011026010848581791, -0.057394128292798996, 0.058580219745635986, -0.03519805148243904, -0.06911490857601166, 0.037292588502168655, 0.055680353194475174, 0.07427290827035904, 0.005147685296833515, -0.04063904657959938, 0.03823382407426834, 0.07159250974655151, 0.061832353472709656, -0.08944536745548248, -0.027074294164776802, -0.05376766249537468, -0.010803181678056717, 0.028772937133908272, 0.06699477881193161, 0.007439319510012865, -0.07210464775562286, -0.048510920256376266, 0.05746607109904289, -0.04246903583407402, 0.1076868548989296, 0.009993909858167171, 0.0737951248884201, -0.04620632156729698, -0.035493962466716766, -0.021241916343569756, -0.021439574658870697, -0.02158171683549881, -0.07297194749116898, 0.02491309866309166, -0.046344440430402756, -0.027685286477208138, 0.00382790993899107, -0.017876271158456802, 0.03426457196474075, -0.07779233157634735, 0.01930551417171955, -0.07638045400381088, -0.04543883353471756, 0.04263515770435333, 0.07880980521440506, 0.0396517775952816, -0.0155138885602355, 0.029167141765356064, -0.07966475188732147, 0.03585712984204292, 0.012453107163310051, -0.028624095022678375, 0.08630593121051788, 0.0038252556696534157, -0.020273616537451744, 0.032377611845731735, -0.017961056903004646, -0.08212113380432129, 0.033423230051994324, 0.03112715855240822, -0.0046957312151789665, 6.407247956243842e-33, 0.038779065012931824, 0.057168979197740555, 0.044579342007637024, -0.019454997032880783, -0.04216733202338219, -0.008023686707019806, -0.0007471523713320494, -0.07453430444002151, 0.029784448444843292, -0.0878339409828186, -0.10642127692699432, 0.02123255282640457, 0.05437801405787468, 0.10165192186832428, -0.03291977569460869, -0.05777895078063011, -0.05377292260527611, 0.04175321385264397, 0.02198038250207901, 0.04639748856425285, 0.031629953533411026, -0.06490097939968109, 0.018706709146499634, 0.03416959196329117, -0.06049584224820137, 0.07162222266197205, -0.01972050964832306, 0.023110467940568924, 0.07891791313886642, 0.034136686474084854, -0.04007056728005409, 0.013566132634878159, 0.07558581233024597, -0.006713234353810549, -0.03979276120662689, 0.01754298061132431, -0.05034671351313591, -0.03593360260128975, -0.007028320338577032, -0.03820587322115898, -0.03156030923128128, 0.059792764484882355, 0.09118056297302246, 0.06164219602942467, 0.014542720280587673, -0.036844637244939804, -0.017534252256155014, 0.04590935260057449, -0.03960787132382393, 0.006254405248910189, -0.027457082644104958, 0.0085628442466259, -0.03876621276140213, 0.013433580286800861, -0.05523521453142166, -0.08441955596208572, -0.04479973763227463, -0.042633820325136185, 0.04198949784040451, -0.009489905089139938, 0.06643971800804138, 0.02641931176185608, 0.03130277991294861, 0.011148789897561073, -0.04331193491816521, -0.003501474391669035, -0.047311343252658844, -0.04250597208738327, 0.017932333052158356, 0.010351214557886124, 0.010839235968887806, -0.0075630065985023975, -0.03951345384120941, -0.019608115777373314, -0.011026440188288689, -0.05362970009446144, 0.08045540750026703, 0.017709726467728615, 0.10724011063575745, -0.06070728600025177, -0.0614284910261631, -0.03137129172682762, 0.06459740549325943, 0.10123127698898315, -0.025034494698047638, -0.002339306054636836, 0.0532926581799984, 0.05204997584223747, -0.035001665353775024, -0.11189984530210495, 0.023229263722896576, -0.04958145692944527, 0.04439449682831764, -0.0398542620241642, 0.035481832921504974, -7.941763261062211e-33, -0.02720896527171135, 0.010603186674416065, 0.03638425096869469, 0.013552307151257992, -0.04338231310248375, -0.04810085520148277, -0.010308234952390194, -0.06621143221855164, 0.04868052154779434, -0.0661187544465065, -0.009908679872751236, -0.0010590218007564545, 0.032814715057611465, -0.024723796173930168, -0.0768037810921669, 0.00009020575816975906, -0.04421588033437729, -0.004859286360442638, -0.002318779705092311, -0.07472794502973557, 0.023202119395136833, 0.029746191576123238, 0.04952037334442139, 0.08883414417505264, -0.009992534294724464, -0.05785154178738594, -0.024991197511553764, -0.0562780387699604, 0.043491389602422714, -0.05115833505988121, -0.10386019200086594, 0.012604573741555214, -0.0803886130452156, 0.039381273090839386, -0.059181131422519684, 0.0016922606155276299, -0.03993484750390053, -0.01681695319712162, -0.002655034651979804, -0.009213120676577091, 0.10096973180770874, -0.057726096361875534, -0.06692785024642944, 0.04405952990055084, -0.043399810791015625, -0.05038856714963913, -0.031193405389785767, -0.003834667382761836, 0.029845915734767914, 0.009432469494640827, -0.07482656836509705, -0.01410912536084652, 0.03179905563592911, 0.010282781906425953, -0.05894916132092476, 0.035923440009355545, 0.06363369524478912, -0.06317844986915588, -0.002541646361351013, 0.03881356492638588, -0.016957871615886688, 0.040551990270614624, -0.05044698715209961, -0.04161177575588226, 0.03702344000339508, -0.07582447677850723, 0.019152570515871048, 0.0538206622004509, 0.02801957167685032, -0.06111792102456093, 0.08422545343637466, -0.07638958096504211, 0.0445941686630249, -0.0656372606754303, 0.02817646786570549, -0.03960725665092468, -0.03237498924136162, -0.028413087129592896, -0.10436008870601654, 0.06549786776304245, 0.01606873795390129, -0.08020421117544174, -0.05805546045303345, 0.08921109884977341, -0.04120185971260071, -0.008982080034911633, 0.049406811594963074, -0.1152697280049324, -0.08472767472267151, 0.09871675819158554, -0.10487446933984756, -0.021390695124864578, -0.06700585037469864, 0.07523146271705627, -0.07933840155601501, -5.5869691095722374e-8, 0.06556971371173859, 0.059044718742370605, 0.007723370101302862, -0.00009657401096774265, 0.058891408145427704, -0.028148699551820755, -0.11036956310272217, -0.04291858524084091, -0.010208170861005783, 0.031329166144132614, 0.1537443995475769, 0.039338890463113785, 0.02305486984550953, -0.033371977508068085, -0.018385358154773712, 0.09141965210437775, -0.041448283940553665, 0.010639195330440998, -0.08374200761318207, 0.01338482927531004, -0.07467649132013321, -0.030292732641100883, -0.05860242247581482, 0.005513635464012623, 0.048064593225717545, 0.07015014439821243, -0.046383555978536606, 0.003967829514294863, 0.018628722056746483, 0.018076609820127487, -0.023664964362978935, -0.03675737604498863, 0.04384206235408783, 0.027884691953659058, -0.05966678634285927, -0.03512188047170639, -0.024991154670715332, -0.008684393018484116, 0.0392758883535862, 0.03911549970507622, -0.03436536341905594, -0.03587111085653305, -0.024369195103645325, 0.06420258432626724, 0.047721173614263535, -0.03234897181391716, -0.08696618676185608, 0.007908367551863194, -0.0002727228566072881, 0.005650708451867104, 0.020977912470698357, -0.02463172748684883, 0.08296580612659454, -0.02509675733745098, -0.0006833964725956321, 0.024035083130002022, -0.020763926208019257, -0.061338793486356735, 0.07494957745075226, -0.020615791901946068, -0.006914603523910046, -0.02367348037660122, 0.09473886340856552, 0.05266322195529938 ]

{ "pdf_file": "4MXIGGV3UCFRYPPPQ4LGGB27K42PFGQV.pdf", "text": " July 19, 2007 PRESS RELEASE: Wilson Introduces Patient And Pharmacists Protection Act Of 2007\n \nBill will help mitigate problem with new prescription writing law\n \nWashington -  Today Congressman Charlie Wilson (D-OH) along with Congressman Marion\nBerry (D-AR) and Congressman Mike Ross (D-AR) introduced the Patient and Pharmacists\nProtection Act of 2007. This legislation would help counteract a little known provision that was\nadded to the recently passed War Supplemental bill (the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care,\nKatrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act) that could do serious harm to\nboth Medicaid beneficiaries and local pharmacists. \nThe problem: \nThe new law mandates that all Medicaid prescriptions must be written on \"tamper resistant\"\npaper in order to be eligible for federal reimbursement beginning October 1, 2007. Currently,\nmost physicians do not use these types of pads, nor are supplies readily available. \nLast year, doctors wrote approximately 330 million prescriptions for Medicaid beneficiaries;\nthat's 11-percent of the nearly 3.1 billion total prescriptions written every year. To implement this\nrequirement in just three short months calls for thousands of new prescriptions and refills to be\nwritten on these \"tamper-proof\" pads. \nThe tamper proof pad law was designed to prevent Medicaid fraud. However, the timeline for\nimplementation could result in patients being turned away from their pharmacies as of October\n1, 2007 if doctors fail to write prescriptions on \"tamper resistant\" paper. \n\"My other concern is that some pharmacies may end up forced to close up shop if they're not\ngetting reimbursed by Medicaid because their clients' prescriptions aren't on tamperproof pads,\"\nWilson said. \"The loss of that rural pharmacy could hurt all of my constituents.\" \nA Solution: \nWilson, Berry and Ross came up with a solution. Their bill, the Patient and Pharmacists\nProtection Act of 2007, would require that only class II narcotics be written on tamper resistant\npaper starting October 1, 2007. \n\"This will prevent the most dangerous fraud without preventing those in need from receiving\ntheir everyday medications,\" Wilson said. \n\"This new bill is a good compromise that will prevent fraud and at the same time alleviate the\nimpact this change will have on local pharmacies and their patients,\" said Berry. \"So many\nsmall-town pharmacies are already struggling to stay in business and this is one way we can\nhelp them continue to help others.\" \n\"We have to find a reasonable approach to helping, not hindering, our health care providers\ndeliver quality health care,\" Ross said. \"I am proud to join with my fellow members of the\n 1 / 2 July 19, 2007 PRESS RELEASE: Wilson Introduces Patient And Pharmacists Protection Act Of 2007\nconservative Democratic Blue Dog Coalition, to introduce this important legislation to ensure\nthat our health care providers continue to have the ability to provide patients with a safe,\nefficient means of receiving their prescriptions, while easing undue burdens on our local\npharmacists and physicians.\"\n \n###\n 2 / 2" }

[ -0.037049029022455215, 0.10961252450942993, 0.04268399626016617, -0.024781130254268646, 0.02714408189058304, 0.09403907507658005, -0.08774438500404358, -0.041181113570928574, -0.07040027529001236, -0.014857938513159752, 0.0167560838162899, 0.053123973309993744, -0.0003728663141373545, -0.06509753316640854, -0.004974076058715582, 0.020505791530013084, -0.0426674447953701, 0.08704955130815506, -0.009967008605599403, -0.04748644307255745, 0.07684843242168427, 0.01209901925176382, -0.05512639880180359, -0.010729987174272537, -0.0022527994588017464, -0.016242429614067078, -0.061887264251708984, 0.033570412546396255, -0.02488081157207489, 0.010099214501678944, -0.009311008267104626, 0.02499302662909031, 0.030982155352830887, 0.0861620083451271, 0.06109505146741867, -0.02145027182996273, 0.006083558313548565, 0.016226252540946007, 0.008424133993685246, 0.0032109459862113, 0.01593196764588356, -0.051840122789144516, 0.043761588633060455, 0.012639625929296017, -0.04762151837348938, 0.03191623464226723, 0.01659315451979637, 0.002258810680359602, -0.06727444380521774, 0.04817057028412819, -0.02556375227868557, 0.045220330357551575, 0.03808026388287544, 0.09966830164194107, -0.04686398804187775, -0.041970159858465195, -0.051678888499736786, -0.05503000691533089, -0.014413053169846535, 0.03367059677839279, -0.03412970155477524, 0.03164359927177429, -0.0533667653799057, 0.010485967621207237, 0.007311143446713686, -0.06717298924922943, 0.0012795919319614768, -0.052041005343198776, -0.06823256611824036, 0.0329209603369236, 0.0001523493992863223, 0.012377998791635036, -0.14001646637916565, 0.04816798120737076, -0.028790563344955444, 0.020555684342980385, -0.05024811252951622, 0.06577222794294357, 0.032132189720869064, -0.1467025876045227, 0.025454692542552948, -0.0403405986726284, -0.018297182396054268, 0.01308887917548418, -0.036974575370550156, -0.0038678429555147886, -0.027536258101463318, -0.005599763244390488, 0.08449335396289825, 0.016321536153554916, 0.09297691285610199, -0.0847184881567955, 0.05201666057109833, -0.011059993878006935, 0.031680263578891754, -0.026734955608844757, 0.0014037148794159293, 0.03752085193991661, 0.02628304436802864, 0.06309974193572998, 0.002903400221839547, -0.0896967202425003, -0.12429282069206238, -0.013409866951406002, -0.03158533573150635, -0.04327961429953575, -0.03169253095984459, -0.006924356333911419, -0.12554369866847992, -0.03402257710695267, 0.04411487653851509, 0.03009498119354248, -0.0021650665439665318, -0.0900457352399826, 0.014395618811249733, 0.003694935468956828, -0.014194365590810776, 0.05548793449997902, 0.043192051351070404, -0.013174585998058319, -0.013879308477044106, 0.08619760721921921, -0.10437961667776108, 0.08162310719490051, -0.054924409836530685, -0.021058565005660057, -0.02201046049594879, 8.913607623708353e-33, 0.037079401314258575, 0.01938045024871826, -0.033732619136571884, 0.02932976931333542, 0.011872588656842709, -0.00033674758742563426, 0.007002940867096186, -0.06355717778205872, 0.0016182181425392628, 0.03201984614133835, -0.03785732388496399, -0.04723631590604782, 0.06637326627969742, -0.00787005852907896, 0.021608423441648483, -0.0009795096702873707, 0.026343271136283875, 0.04811803624033928, -0.051100511103868484, 0.05110543966293335, 0.05973250791430473, -0.02282927744090557, -0.044076476246118546, 0.09331134706735611, -0.05513537675142288, 0.04215908423066139, -0.08584567904472351, -0.0573907271027565, -0.06311573088169098, 0.04563901200890541, 0.0005512356874532998, 0.00993685144931078, 0.06221429258584976, 0.03632837161421776, 0.05318232625722885, 0.05551030486822128, 0.03951955959200859, -0.07267630100250244, -0.040441978722810745, -0.041061725467443466, -0.020260250195860863, 0.054767169058322906, 0.1289636641740799, -0.029173368588089943, 0.04564620926976204, 0.010468950495123863, -0.004084935411810875, 0.08147480338811874, 0.03180604800581932, 0.08780849725008011, 0.030487610027194023, 0.042928505688905716, 0.09646627306938171, -0.06142161786556244, 0.02647692710161209, -0.04885970056056976, -0.033973775804042816, 0.07485701143741608, 0.04955222085118294, 0.07192853838205338, -0.006715191528201103, 0.10606207698583603, -0.08382327854633331, 0.04600285738706589, -0.04978083446621895, -0.00193276337813586, -0.038627684116363525, 0.05365028604865074, 0.07807982712984085, -0.019819065928459167, 0.026623543351888657, 0.04631072282791138, 0.007538545876741409, -0.020930565893650055, 0.011730959638953209, -0.013050626032054424, 0.06292570382356644, 0.006899897009134293, -0.005730411969125271, -0.009674699045717716, -0.02764667384326458, 0.008384951390326023, 0.012616091407835484, -0.03353331983089447, 0.081659235060215, -0.09851193428039551, 0.07965085655450821, 0.008716551586985588, 0.0247513260692358, 0.022744499146938324, 0.028719013556838036, -0.02842707559466362, 0.06518349051475525, 0.06692925095558167, -0.020465755835175514, -9.312623303623224e-33, -0.06358077377080917, -0.015303593128919601, -0.009673205204308033, -0.025653880089521408, 0.01942732185125351, 0.014750019647181034, 0.025752248242497444, -0.050134554505348206, 0.010999534279108047, -0.07353580743074417, 0.04662526026368141, -0.05587362125515938, 0.04930021986365318, -0.028445113450288773, -0.04343302547931671, -0.03612289950251579, -0.009895915165543556, 0.059547968208789825, -0.10973068326711655, 0.05263008922338486, 0.06546948850154877, -0.003932260908186436, -0.024967119097709656, 0.08888284116983414, 0.06869091838598251, -0.019348889589309692, 0.036055997014045715, -0.00033272564178332686, -0.03230121359229088, -0.014243963174521923, -0.09484396874904633, -0.02520844154059887, -0.11283678561449051, 0.0870344415307045, 0.050393443554639816, -0.08938678354024887, 0.06481572985649109, 0.005440630950033665, -0.019955018535256386, 0.010308997705578804, 0.056076787412166595, 0.004054295364767313, -0.0009684036485850811, 0.11393468081951141, -0.05513395369052887, -0.00541669363155961, -0.01304264273494482, -0.01968894898891449, 0.04035692289471626, 0.03317836672067642, -0.08685661107301712, -0.015180395916104317, 0.014718511141836643, 0.07277721166610718, -0.017880896106362343, -0.06066577509045601, 0.05446499586105347, -0.03671923652291298, -0.02492031641304493, 0.01001743134111166, 0.004053761251270771, 0.09143990278244019, 0.0017247487558051944, 0.09603863954544067, 0.08203767985105515, -0.08906514942646027, -0.0661325603723526, -0.02313784696161747, -0.008367350324988365, -0.023828141391277313, -0.007694235071539879, -0.0811120942234993, -0.08073596656322479, -0.11004367470741272, -0.03143725171685219, -0.03932174667716026, 0.06162065267562866, 0.00419295858591795, -0.14173777401447296, 0.05556858330965042, -0.04143829271197319, -0.049523938447237015, -0.028686905279755592, 0.06301333755254745, 0.07392548769712448, 0.046838078647851944, 0.023699896410107613, -0.06257206946611404, 0.03554271534085274, 0.027124928310513496, -0.068873330950737, -0.03151264041662216, -0.004367876797914505, 0.022191958501935005, -0.0445639006793499, -6.295327636962611e-8, -0.005465875379741192, 0.006508244201540947, -0.08866094052791595, 0.040757421404123306, 0.059030044823884964, -0.005671312566846609, -0.030895022675395012, -0.04440069571137428, -0.02783305197954178, 0.01747259311378002, 0.12286816537380219, 0.05506317317485809, 0.027082880958914757, -0.1112271398305893, 0.01820654794573784, -0.02656184695661068, -0.02654646895825863, -0.038912367075681686, -0.059335265308618546, -0.04098427668213844, 0.003903947537764907, 0.029456650838255882, -0.03162049502134323, -0.008798700757324696, -0.04654891416430473, 0.04951423406600952, -0.03967057168483734, 0.04393993690609932, 0.0665370374917984, 0.08619103580713272, -0.05433265119791031, 0.029094785451889038, -0.05945451185107231, -0.05699293315410614, -0.07398689538240433, -0.0447278767824173, 0.006932470947504044, 0.016888093203306198, 0.0407055988907814, -0.03892098739743233, -0.02701002173125744, 0.003886559046804905, -0.02369317226111889, 0.06058301031589508, 0.051905516535043716, -0.09640008956193924, -0.10157182067632675, -0.02272241748869419, 0.018941568210721016, -0.0528019517660141, 0.016979044303297997, -0.006551781203597784, 0.05416963994503021, 0.007742542307823896, 0.03766050934791565, 0.019794592633843422, 0.032747700810432434, -0.05659494921565056, -0.07353194802999496, -0.07347753643989563, 0.06893369555473328, 0.008463901467621326, 0.03446381911635399, 0.03510286659002304 ]

{ "pdf_file": "MLTHHOQT47LRXDG7YYRMF2QXDUPSXSF4.pdf", "text": "AMENDMENT \nOFFERED BY MS. TITUS OF NEVADA\n[aahca09 l001]\nIn section 202(c), strike paragraph (3) and insert \nthe following:\n(3) T HIRD YEAR .—In Y3— 1\n(A) individuals and employers described in 2\nparagraph (2); 3\n(B) larger employers described in sub- 4\nsection (e)(3); and 5\n(C) largest employers as permitted by the 6\nCommissioner under subsection (e)(4). 7\n(4) F OURTH AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS .—In Y4 8\nand subsequent years— 9\n(A) individuals and employers described in 10\nparagraph (3); and 11\n(B) largest employers as permitted by the 12\nCommissioner under subsection (e)(4). 13\nIn section 202(e), strike paragraphs (1) through (3) \nand insert the following (and redesignate the succeeding paragraphs accordingly):\nVerDate 0ct 09 2002 18:34 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6301 C:\\TEMP\\TITUS1~1.XML HOLCPCJuly 14, 2009 (6:34 p.m.)F:\\P11\\NHI\\TRICOMM\\AMDS\\TITUS1_002.XML\nf:\\VHLC\\071409\\071409.363.xml (444530|1) 2\n(1) S MALLEST EMPLOYERS .—Subject to para- 1\ngraph (5), smallest employers described in this para- 2\ngraph are employers with 15 or fewer employees. 3\n(2) S MALLER EMPLOYERS .—Subject to para- 4\ngraph (5), smaller employers described in this para- 5\ngraph are employers that are not smallest employers 6\ndescribed in paragraph (1) and that have 25 or 7\nfewer employees. 8\n(3) L ARGER EMPLOYERS .—Subject to para- 9\ngraph (5), larger employers described in this para- 10\ngraph are employers that are not smallest employers 11\ndescribed in paragraph (1) or smaller employers de- 12\nscribed in paragraph (2) and that have 50 or fewer 13\nemployees. 14\n(4) L ARGEST EMPLOYERS .— 15\n(A) I N GENERAL .—Beginning with Y3, the 16\nCommissioner may permit employers not de- 17\nscribed in paragraphs (1) (2), or (3) to be Ex- 18\nchange-eligible employers. 19\n(B) P HASE -IN.—In applying subparagraph 20\n(A), the Commissioner may phase-in the appli- 21\ncation of such subparagraph based on the num- 22\nber of full-time employees of an employer and 23\nVerDate 0ct 09 2002 18:34 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\\TEMP\\TITUS1~1.XML HOLCPCJuly 14, 2009 (6:34 p.m.)F:\\P11\\NHI\\TRICOMM\\AMDS\\TITUS1_002.XML\nf:\\VHLC\\071409\\071409.363.xml (444530|1) 3\nsuch other considerations as the Commissioner 1\ndeems appropriate. 2\n◊\nVerDate 0ct 09 2002 18:34 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6301 C:\\TEMP\\TITUS1~1.XML HOLCPCJuly 14, 2009 (6:34 p.m.)F:\\P11\\NHI\\TRICOMM\\AMDS\\TITUS1_002.XML\nf:\\VHLC\\071409\\071409.363.xml (444530|1)" }

[ 0.02124592661857605, 0.06465650349855423, 0.04465249180793762, -0.06189079210162163, 0.09648917615413666, -0.03029138222336769, 0.027806181460618973, -0.04906987026333809, -0.003841314697638154, 0.027820806950330734, 0.032837264239788055, -0.03480643779039383, -0.03558362275362015, 0.0892261490225792, -0.053179532289505005, 0.02946537546813488, -0.008598722517490387, -0.021188749000430107, -0.04505440965294838, 0.004424950107932091, -0.050954341888427734, 0.04459116980433464, 0.06977054476737976, -0.01924143359065056, -0.16859517991542816, 0.0030456758104264736, -0.010966772213578224, 0.06667952239513397, -0.0432598702609539, -0.02328355610370636, 0.0391104482114315, -0.04046744853258133, -0.058319341391325, -0.0048822215758264065, -0.028587408363819122, 0.057696521282196045, 0.06008744239807129, -0.07395777851343155, 0.07699968665838242, 0.027651213109493256, 0.028996098786592484, -0.10927563905715942, -0.00934185553342104, -0.058875929564237595, 0.008100559934973717, 0.031374283134937286, -0.06846695393323898, 0.04826746881008148, 0.11558473855257034, -0.10372106730937958, 0.03607182577252388, 0.0003158562758471817, -0.021105961874127388, 0.06990809738636017, 0.0650414451956749, 0.04516264796257019, 0.011931516230106354, -0.12029866129159927, -0.09420172870159149, -0.13713204860687256, 0.0862262025475502, -0.005665550474077463, -0.037820786237716675, 0.004543502815067768, -0.06450251489877701, -0.03853439912199974, 0.00029730668757110834, 0.02990124188363552, 0.16051526367664337, 0.07599308341741562, -0.006793527398258448, -0.01587912067770958, -0.09735608100891113, 0.029796084389090538, -0.017839927226305008, 0.11652473360300064, -0.024378180503845215, -0.05576608330011368, 0.12885859608650208, -0.01858200505375862, -0.0011472908081486821, -0.026386862620711327, 0.09934584051370621, -0.00302314106374979, 0.011955552734434605, 0.026863405480980873, 0.01666266657412052, -0.02729419432580471, 0.02443707175552845, -0.0168533306568861, 0.03820650652050972, -0.031916141510009766, 0.04795808345079422, -0.014675172045826912, 0.06935969740152359, -0.009740898385643959, 0.0008111506467685103, -0.07537516206502914, -0.01780226081609726, 0.04988376423716545, -0.0404113307595253, -0.12585319578647614, -0.03940698504447937, -0.03200874105095863, 0.026280894875526428, -0.022232700139284134, 0.014591528102755547, 0.019623778760433197, -0.004613704048097134, 0.03943660482764244, -0.06269832700490952, 0.05480191856622696, -0.00910887774080038, 0.07039032131433487, -0.02955813519656658, 0.06627252697944641, 0.014636235311627388, -0.007930170744657516, -0.0105747040361166, 0.04138065502047539, 0.05565300211310387, 0.01792442984879017, 0.01610507443547249, -0.015181554481387138, 0.07107201963663101, 0.07917886972427368, -0.029674425721168518, 3.334402132754716e-33, 0.04732620343565941, 0.018761804327368736, 0.00010670041956473142, -0.010875322856009007, 0.05419128015637398, 0.024688908830285072, -0.06822586059570312, -0.05628066509962082, 0.07805640250444412, 0.015882885083556175, 0.010851232334971428, -0.03483252599835396, -0.01911315694451332, -0.04692282900214195, 0.09415034204721451, -0.04178136959671974, 0.057000305503606796, -0.009970499202609062, 0.052269451320171356, -0.03269060701131821, -0.006334668956696987, -0.1017342284321785, -0.011165117844939232, 0.027937814593315125, 0.10652661323547363, -0.01269613765180111, -0.06318999826908112, -0.06644202023744583, 0.0003963408526033163, 0.028937164694070816, 0.052618060261011124, -0.01931873708963394, -0.052721790969371796, -0.014287341386079788, -0.05795147642493248, 0.0005937092937529087, -0.028610995039343834, -0.06257329136133194, -0.022430960088968277, -0.0322895422577858, 0.0006671934970654547, -0.0415266677737236, 0.04705176129937172, -0.0019245772855356336, 0.10415773838758469, -0.06424729526042938, -0.037713438272476196, 0.00468115508556366, -0.07960928231477737, 0.039431069046258926, 0.03974122181534767, -0.036184292286634445, -0.013793176040053368, -0.13977235555648804, -0.05572892352938652, -0.07297169417142868, 0.017199859023094177, -0.07366296648979187, 0.0035397761967033148, -0.013029578141868114, -0.029336251318454742, 0.016056211665272713, 0.025391701608896255, -0.018014399334788322, 0.08265572786331177, -0.1361633539199829, 0.04389343038201332, 0.027962809428572655, -0.06589043140411377, 0.007190418895334005, -0.010223993100225925, 0.02748199738562107, -0.016037555411458015, -0.08794520050287247, -0.10761310160160065, -0.003879208117723465, -0.04147752746939659, -0.001002511358819902, 0.0111596854403615, -0.01814809814095497, 0.0652909055352211, 0.06648730486631393, -0.01047807652503252, 0.02876262180507183, -0.013568098656833172, -0.013381903059780598, -0.0107200276106596, 0.05900873243808746, 0.03921081870794296, -0.026351727545261383, 0.07410532981157303, 0.056299302726984024, -0.0017439094372093678, -0.04500644654035568, -0.022338977083563805, -4.5448005842727634e-33, 0.005450668279081583, 0.020882930606603622, -0.004465774167329073, -0.006627910770475864, -0.007063655182719231, -0.00880494061857462, 0.005165732000023127, 0.03653879463672638, 0.06366001069545746, -0.03380228579044342, -0.09106151759624481, 0.049385230988264084, 0.052255768328905106, -0.04924794286489487, -0.035328324884176254, 0.005720627494156361, -0.020454522222280502, -0.026213202625513077, -0.0051599121652543545, -0.026335610076785088, -0.04966183006763458, 0.03282880038022995, 0.03267709165811539, 0.011204609647393227, -0.0663260892033577, 0.023156046867370605, -0.04314427077770233, 0.02381635271012783, -0.017701976001262665, -0.06038955971598625, 0.026705464348196983, -0.04330248013138771, 0.03151704743504524, -0.03265981376171112, -0.00898109469562769, -0.037889618426561356, 0.059490229934453964, -0.028671927750110626, 0.06110534071922302, -0.026942050084471703, 0.06487634032964706, 0.0028146025724709034, -0.06012365594506264, -0.03661929816007614, -0.021715713664889336, 0.04784109443426132, -0.04473289102315903, -0.054349686950445175, -0.02358144149184227, 0.027171235531568527, 0.018802188336849213, -0.02160685695707798, -0.012901927344501019, -0.04206188768148422, -0.024270938709378242, -0.002429673448204994, 0.051656242460012436, -0.04295404255390167, -0.04215963929891586, 0.05471218377351761, 0.0039484212175011635, 0.06771502643823624, -0.04891210421919823, 0.12420609593391418, -0.006400718819350004, -0.00046093814307823777, -0.021352384239435196, 0.06651783734560013, 0.04908286780118942, -0.09653574228286743, -0.08743201941251755, 0.09412140399217606, -0.04122273251414299, -0.09485730528831482, -0.01867745630443096, -0.07534195482730865, 0.046483833342790604, -0.013540461659431458, 0.050737299025058746, 0.07003651559352875, 0.0004298557178117335, -0.0583391971886158, -0.03419233486056328, -0.05842443183064461, 0.047491054981946945, -0.06388206779956818, 0.023803045973181725, 0.0013234028592705727, 0.009020524099469185, 0.02888362668454647, -0.048047762364149094, -0.009059280157089233, 0.016164327040314674, 0.08827314525842667, 0.015294571407139301, -4.3153626450020965e-8, 0.0670863464474678, 0.037560299038887024, 0.07221764326095581, 0.006948827765882015, 0.03452359512448311, -0.03842778876423836, -0.028676504269242287, 0.03050920180976391, 0.10555162280797958, -0.007141275331377983, -0.03427454084157944, -0.019557755440473557, 0.03285478055477142, -0.013449695892632008, 0.08460395783185959, -0.03841528668999672, -0.004552621394395828, -0.028907474130392075, -0.08061405271291733, -0.05781182274222374, -0.09470951557159424, 0.027262741699814796, 0.012723748572170734, 0.0281768087297678, 0.04275120049715042, -0.04878813400864601, 0.0913294330239296, -0.0710471123456955, 0.0326114259660244, 0.07380015403032303, -0.07775145769119263, 0.012534520588815212, -0.014297479763627052, 0.10448703914880753, -0.06866567581892014, -0.030021632090210915, 0.04623609781265259, -0.00871951412409544, 0.04487241432070732, 0.09745080024003983, -0.026783065870404243, 0.023142218589782715, -0.04147958755493164, -0.0071350643411278725, -0.006642511580139399, -0.03478498011827469, 0.004544526804238558, -0.011700174771249294, -0.024405308067798615, -0.02655424363911152, 0.0558224692940712, -0.0043151406571269035, 0.06488383561372757, 0.08104307949542999, -0.04790106415748596, 0.044387880712747574, 0.009966759942471981, -0.05699044466018677, 0.10726676881313324, 0.009875043295323849, -0.04121655225753784, -0.012899821624159813, -0.041757721453905106, 0.021865200251340866 ]

{ "pdf_file": "KMUKXIW52KNJ3JJJ2LO5QOW2G6FTJ45W.pdf", "text": "Backyard Biosecurity\n6Ways To Prevent Poultry Diseases\nKeep Your Distance.\nRestrict access to your property and\nyour birds. Consider fencing off the\narea where you keep your birds and\nmake a barrier area if possible. Allow\nonly people who take care of your birds\nto come into contact with them. If visi-\ntors have birds of their own, do not let\nthem near your birds. Game birds and\nmigratory waterfowl should not have\ncontact with your flock because theycan carry germs and diseases. Keep It Clean.\nWear clean clothes, scrub your shoes\nwith disinfectant, and wash your hands\nthoroughly before entering your bird\narea. Clean cages and change food and\nwater daily. Clean and disinfect equip-\nment that comes in contact with yourbirds or their droppings, including cages\nand tools. Remove manure before dis-\ninfecting. Properly dispose of deadbirds.1 2\nDon’t Haul Disease\nHome.\nIfyou have been near other birds or\nbird owners, such as at a feed store,\nclean and disinfect car and truck tires,\npoultry cages, and equipment before\ngoing home. Have your birds been to afair or exhibition? Keep them separated\nfrom the rest of your flock for at least 2\nweeks after the event. New birds shouldbe kept separate from your flock for at\nleast 30 days. 3\nDon’t Borrow Disease\nFrom Your Neighbor.\nDo not shar elawn and gar den equip -\nment, tools, or poultry supplies with\nyour neighbors or other bird owners. Ifyou do bring these items home, clean\nand disinfect them befor ethey r each\nyour property. 4 Know the Warning\nSigns of Infectious BirdDiseases.\n•Sudden incr ease in bird deaths in your\nflock\n• Sneezing, gasping for air, coughing,\nand nasal dischar ge\n• Watery and green diarrhea\n•Lack of ener gy and poor appetite\n•Drop in egg pr oduction or soft- or\nthin-shelled misshapen eggs \n• Swelling around the eyes, neck, and\nhead\n• Purple discoloration of the wattles,\ncombs, and legs (AI)\n•Tremors, drooping wings, circling,\ntwisting of the head and neck, or lack\nof movement (END)\nEarly detection is impor tant to pr event\nthe spread of disease.5 Report Sick Birds.\nDon’twait. If your bir ds are sick or\ndying, call your local cooperative exten -\nsion office, local veterinarian, the State\nVeterinarian, or U.S. Department ofAgricultur e(USDA) V eterinar yServices\noffice to find out why .USDA operates a\ntoll-free hotline (\n1–866–536–7593 )with\nveterinarians to help you. Ther eis no\ncharge for this ser vice.6\nYou are the best protection your birds have.\nUnited States Department of Agriculture\nAnimal and Plant Health Inspection ServiceUSDA is an equal oppor tunity provider and employer.\nProgram Aid No.1764-C\nIssued May 2004\n" }

[ -0.06590693444013596, 0.002458982402458787, -0.03751269355416298, -0.02704627625644207, -0.027735361829400063, 0.007096984889358282, -0.07551348954439163, 0.09909159690141678, -0.03378567099571228, -0.06677072495222092, -0.11071297526359558, -0.04769551008939743, 0.001186820911243558, -0.006404980551451445, -0.06298740953207016, 0.0016687334282323718, -0.0232046227902174, -0.01736491173505783, -0.0555543415248394, -0.04410785064101219, 0.04153292626142502, 0.13118372857570648, 0.029020221903920174, 0.038201719522476196, 0.05315566807985306, -0.020186489447951317, -0.02389504574239254, 0.07417251914739609, 0.04972168803215027, -0.022691864520311356, -0.08854681998491287, -0.007822521030902863, 0.03183459863066673, 0.0077448394149541855, 0.11335378885269165, -0.023324325680732727, 0.09620066732168198, 0.042886752635240555, 0.0010882994392886758, 0.032361455261707306, 0.03388591855764389, -0.05832463875412941, 0.01071961596608162, 0.028563762083649635, 0.0241510309278965, 0.04744075611233711, -0.039990752935409546, 0.012386448681354523, -0.06815897673368454, 0.09438621997833252, -0.02339659072458744, 0.02189837023615837, 0.022738952189683914, 0.0979304313659668, 0.06884343922138214, 0.010475444607436657, -0.010948332026600838, -0.008408969268202782, 0.02093324437737465, -0.05381176993250847, -0.017452847212553024, -0.05358181521296501, -0.03266816586256027, -0.011804540641605854, -0.03128403425216675, -0.022767532616853714, -0.07934141159057617, -0.03443063423037529, 0.023620376363396645, -0.051093947142362595, -0.1341933012008667, -0.064999520778656, -0.026942383497953415, 0.01793610118329525, -0.015490137040615082, 0.04050542414188385, 0.02144044265151024, 0.006963972467929125, -0.03357957676053047, 0.0008605261100456119, -0.01223748829215765, 0.01973576284945011, 0.07920974493026733, -0.09774812310934067, -0.04591727256774902, 0.0829382985830307, -0.0055604251101613045, 0.015263822861015797, 0.01064195018261671, -0.01473651360720396, 0.0029094412457197905, 0.01337440125644207, 0.012110342271625996, 0.03727386146783829, 0.02337539941072464, -0.016658306121826172, 0.026695022359490395, 0.04369311034679413, 0.02172207646071911, 0.02262721210718155, 0.01092259306460619, 0.05147532746195793, -0.09565931558609009, 0.005646685604006052, -0.05805211514234543, 0.027020743116736412, 0.07834182679653168, 0.09235958009958267, -0.009597879834473133, 0.011704940348863602, 0.035669956356287, -0.05049411579966545, -0.003051615785807371, -0.11387728899717331, 0.042784132063388824, -0.06752239912748337, -0.06422208249568939, -0.010419485159218311, -0.01282887626439333, -0.013278372585773468, -0.02807658351957798, -0.015152430161833763, -0.0586172491312027, -0.057135023176670074, 0.0021776272915303707, 0.007998323999345303, -0.07341773062944412, 4.654797468150959e-33, 0.002750036073848605, 0.023651443421840668, 0.0042984867468476295, 0.048360951244831085, -0.0646219328045845, 0.14488685131072998, -0.03537094593048096, 0.0025343422312289476, 0.09012999385595322, 0.013327366672456264, -0.03881872072815895, 0.03715682029724121, -0.02778884954750538, -0.09907308220863342, -0.14705725014209747, -0.025795143097639084, 0.04206002503633499, 0.036820340901613235, -0.024000655859708786, 0.01899080164730549, 0.03510137274861336, -0.021633541211485863, -0.04736868664622307, -0.0571221299469471, 0.08586231619119644, 0.0657600611448288, 0.06892503052949905, -0.02021951414644718, -0.0308148805052042, 0.016648830845952034, 0.08617859333753586, -0.008835806511342525, -0.03269035741686821, -0.04411445930600166, -0.05722283199429512, -0.08496931940317154, -0.04815074801445007, 0.05498335510492325, -0.0626128688454628, 0.005721884313970804, 0.000990714062936604, 0.08710991591215134, -0.03218317776918411, 0.04884808510541916, 0.017044655978679657, -0.032184142619371414, 0.0123174749314785, -0.007489925716072321, 0.08661292493343353, 0.024463634938001633, -0.004464387893676758, 0.06741119921207428, -0.001850189990364015, 0.009973503649234772, 0.033875543624162674, 0.001737478538416326, -0.01234069000929594, -0.011094676330685616, 0.02628757618367672, 0.04601429030299187, -0.026463020592927933, 0.0640469565987587, -0.04237690567970276, -0.04215770587325096, 0.042714983224868774, 0.034504253417253494, -0.03649499639868736, 0.025325238704681396, 0.05999298021197319, -0.013910919427871704, -0.07370708882808685, -0.05129304528236389, -0.005402515176683664, 0.06134349852800369, -0.06254816055297852, -0.11094614118337631, 0.09853038191795349, 0.033758215606212616, 0.0034824900794774294, -0.04987803474068642, -0.039021652191877365, 0.03452790156006813, 0.11287731677293777, -0.06629927456378937, 0.01244726125150919, -0.14630268514156342, -0.03419412299990654, -0.02725233882665634, -0.03871957212686539, -0.02487771213054657, -0.008293956518173218, -0.03595955669879913, -0.0134584940969944, 0.02372071146965027, 0.02748001553118229, -4.000459272449702e-33, 0.08788655698299408, 0.05415797233581543, -0.12461891770362854, 0.06263450533151627, 0.0066975378431379795, -0.01016705110669136, 0.0958029106259346, -0.0945994183421135, 0.07821299880743027, -0.07197549194097519, 0.026461608707904816, 0.06579367071390152, 0.049520343542099, 0.11105843633413315, 0.04957381263375282, 0.007973141968250275, -0.03956326097249985, -0.11604046821594238, -0.04764873534440994, 0.0020419966895133257, -0.00578096741810441, 0.004619225859642029, -0.060456328094005585, 0.0011341203935444355, -0.06821431964635849, 0.05725134164094925, -0.024586444720625877, -0.08119035512208939, -0.028349602594971657, 0.018690984696149826, 0.02696160040795803, 0.008774041198194027, -0.05592242628335953, 0.04254794120788574, -0.07197120040655136, -0.08297200500965118, 0.0020723647903651, 0.06526747345924377, 0.0070776743814349174, 0.007306652143597603, 0.042427629232406616, 0.056078940629959106, -0.050869349390268326, -0.038238123059272766, -0.06363020837306976, 0.05497286841273308, 0.15056274831295013, -0.1415746510028839, 0.031598806381225586, 0.03599567338824272, -0.011743549257516861, -0.04600663110613823, -0.047404516488313675, 0.08899053186178207, 0.0889115110039711, -0.016751719638705254, 0.05595450475811958, 0.05261307954788208, -0.07438942790031433, 0.026683742180466652, 0.08575687557458878, 0.06290564686059952, 0.07566703110933304, 0.016621893271803856, -0.008331443183124065, -0.0035370788536965847, 0.03524044528603554, -0.011644023470580578, 0.09060687571763992, -0.011602071113884449, -0.03413120657205582, 0.04766841605305672, 0.04768362268805504, -0.009112735278904438, -0.007166972383856773, -0.012503250502049923, 0.031752754002809525, -0.03934582322835922, -0.019201157614588737, 0.04303737357258797, -0.07188421487808228, 0.030391739681363106, -0.04591734707355499, 0.11457698047161102, 0.05617504566907883, -0.026979107409715652, 0.08978158235549927, -0.01043824665248394, 0.019738635048270226, 0.020634055137634277, 0.035501834005117416, 0.004302067682147026, -0.015479969792068005, 0.05409940332174301, 0.006245697848498821, -5.4687856021473635e-8, -0.048004038631916046, 0.005361867602914572, -0.044920168817043304, 0.02993163652718067, -0.03544251248240471, -0.00985922385007143, -0.02710365131497383, 0.056859295815229416, -0.045459896326065063, 0.004031268879771233, 0.05890871211886406, -0.03667052462697029, 0.045279622077941895, -0.03349526599049568, 0.07842249423265457, -0.048580318689346313, -0.014505893923342228, -0.02219988778233528, -0.00721208518370986, 0.029896140098571777, -0.01729215867817402, -0.03809231147170067, -0.014070205390453339, -0.014492204412817955, 0.003933959174901247, -0.021567143499851227, -0.029446542263031006, 0.007816564291715622, 0.05801358446478844, 0.03828154876828194, 0.026794735342264175, 0.022196317091584206, 0.021129325032234192, -0.061260778456926346, 0.05965070426464081, -0.03627212345600128, -0.006195911206305027, 0.0630379468202591, -0.01638374663889408, 0.03261829540133476, 0.05360690876841545, -0.04463280737400055, 0.008539616130292416, -0.030648458749055862, -0.004525027237832546, 0.07440789043903351, -0.06627921760082245, 0.0032155951485037804, -0.0715302899479866, 0.010823762975633144, 0.038441311568021774, 0.01740119792521, 0.07731097936630249, 0.01558235939592123, 0.08378476649522781, 0.008280061185359955, -0.05254137143492699, -0.007724779658019543, 0.02433958277106285, -0.009526640176773071, -0.02865774929523468, 0.038140952587127686, -0.024292074143886566, -0.09958666563034058 ]

{ "pdf_file": "SRBFXQ2CMPHQJYYT64FYLRHKT6XZUUIB.pdf", "text": "SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \n06/09/09 15195-1 BUCKLEY AFB SECTION 15195 - FACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING\n \nPART 1 - GENERAL \n1.01 SUMMARY : \nA. Section Includes: 1. Pipes, tubes, and fittings. \n2. Piping specialties. \n3. Piping and tubing joining materials. \n4. Valves. \n5. Pressure regulators. \n1.02 REFERENCES\n: \nA. Applicable Standards (latest editions): \n1. American Gas Association/International Code Council (AGA/ICC): \na. 2003 International Fuel Gas Code. \n2. American National Standards Institute (ANSI): a. B109.1 - Diaphragm-Type Gas Displaceme nt Meters (500 Cubic Feet per Hour \nCapacity and Under). \nb. B109.2 - Diaphragm-Type Gas Displacement Meters (over 500 Cubic Feet per Hour \nCapacity). \nc. B109.3 - Rotary-Type Gas Displacement Meters. \nd. Z21.18 - Gas Appliance Pressure Regulators. \ne. Z21.21 - Automatic Valves for Gas Appliances. \nf. Z21.24 - Metal Connectors for Gas Appliances. \ng. Z21.41 - Quick Disconnect Devices for Use with Gas Fuel Appliances. \nh. Z21.69 - Connectors for Movable Gas Appliances. \ni. Z21.75 - Connectors for Outdoor Gas Appliances and Manufactured Homes. \nj. Z21.80 - Line Pressure Regulators. \n3. American National Standards Institute/Int ernational Approval Services (ANSI/IAS): \na. LC 1 - Fuel Gas Piping Systems Using Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST). \n4. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): a. 25 - Earthquake Actuated Automatic Gas Shutoff Devices. \n5. American Welding Society (AWS): a. A5.8/A5.8M - Specifications for Filler Metals for Brazing and Braze Welding. \nb. D1.1/D1.1M - Structural Welding Code - Steel. \nc. D10.12/D10.12M - Guide for Welding Mild Steel Pipe. \nd. AWS Brazing Handbook. Ch. 22, \"Pipe and Tube.\" \n6. ASME International (ASME): a. B16.5 - Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings. \nb. B16.20 - Metallic Flat Gaskets for Pipe Flanges: Ring Joint Spiral Wound and \nJacketed. \nc. B16.22 - Wrought Copper and Copper A lloy Solder Joint Pressure Fittings. \nd. B16.24 - Cast Copper Alloy Pipe Flanges, Class 150, 300, 400, 600, 900, 1500, and \n2500, and Flanged Fittings, Class 150 and 300. \ne. B16.26 - Cast Copper Alloy Fittings for Flared Copper Tubes. \nf. B16.33 - Manually Operated Metallic Gas Valves for Use in Gas Piping Systems up \nto 125 psig (Sizes 1/2 through 2). SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \nBUCKLEY AFB 15195-2 06/09/09 g. B16.38 - Large Metallic Valves for Gas Di stribution (Manually Operated, NPS 2-\n1/2 to 12, 125 psig Maximum). \nh. B16.40 - Manually Operated Thermoplas tic Gas Shutoffs and Valves in Gas \nDistribution Systems. \ni. B18.2.1 - Square and Hex Bolts and Screws, Inch Series. \nj. MFC-4M - Measurement of Gas Flow by Turbine Meters. \nk. 2004 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel C ode: Section IX, \"Welding and Brazing \nQualifications.\" \n7. ASTM International (ASTM): \na. A53/A53M - Pipe, Steel, Black and Ho t-Dipped, Zinc-Coated Welded and \nSeamless. \nb. A126 - Gray Iron Castings for Valves, Flanges, and Pipe Fittings. \nc. A234/A234M - Piping Fittings of Wrought Carbon Steel and Alloy Steel for \nModerated and High Temperature Service. \nd. A240/A240M - Chromium and Chromium-Nickel Stainless Steel Plate, Sheet, and \nStrip for Pressure Vessels and for General Applications. \ne. B88 - Seamless Copper Water Tube. \nf. B88M - Seamless Copper Water Tube [Metric]. \ng. B210 - Aluminum and Aluminum-Alloy Drawn Seamless Tubes. \nh. B241/B241M - Aluminum and Aluminum-A lloy Seamless Pipe and Seamless \nExtruded Tube. \ni. B280 - Seamless Copper Tube for Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Field Service. \nj. B584 - Copper Alloy Sand Castings for General Applications. \nk. B837 - Seamless Copper Tube for Natural Gas and Liquefied Petroleum (LP) Gas Fuel Distribution System. \nl. C1107 - Packaged Dry, Hydraulic-Cement Grout (Nonshrink). \nm. D2513 - Thermoplastic Gas Pressure Pipe, Tubing, and Fittings. \nn. D2657 - Practice for Heat Fusion Joining of Polyolefin Pipe and Fittings. \no. D2683 - Socket-Type Polyethylene Fittings for Outside Diameter Controlled Polyethylene Pipe and Tubing. \np. D3261 - Butt Heat Fusion Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Fittings for Polyethylene (PE) \nPlastic Pipe and Tubing. \nq. E84 - Test Method for Surface Burning Ch aracteristics of Building Materials. \n8. CSA International (CSA): \na. B149.1 - Natural Gas and Pr opane Installation Code. \n9. Manufacturers Standardization Society of Th e Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc. (MSS): \na. SP-69 - Pipe Hangars and Supports - Selection and Application. \n10. National Electric Manufacturers Association (NEMA): \na. ICS 6 - Industrial Control and Systems Enclosures. \n11. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA): \na. 54 - National Fuel Gas Code (ANSI). \nb. 70 - National Electric Code. \n12. SAE International (SAE): a. J513 - Refrigeration Tube Fittings. \n13. Underwriters Laboratory (UL): a. 429 - Electrically Operated Valves. \n1.03 DEFINITIONS\n: SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \n06/09/09 15195-3 BUCKELY AFB A. Finished Spaces: Spaces other than mechanical and electrical equipment rooms, furred spaces, \npipe and duct shafts, unheated spaces immediately below roof, spaces above ceilings, unexcavated spaces, crawlspaces, and tunnels. \nB. Exposed, Interior Installations: Exposed to view indoors. Examples include finished occupied \nspaces and mechanical equipment rooms. \nC. Exposed, Exterior Installations: Exposed to view outdoors or subject to outdoor ambient \ntemperatures and weather conditions. Examples include rooftop locations. \n1.04 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS\n: \nA. Minimum Operating-Pressure Ratings: \n1. Piping and Valves: 100 psig (690 kPa) minimum unless otherwise indicated. \nB. Natural-Gas System Pressure within Buildings: More than 0.5 psig (3.45 kPa) but not more \nthan 2 psig (13.8 kPa). \nC. Delegated Design: Design restraints and an chors for natural-gas piping and equipment, \nincluding comprehensive engineering analysis by a qualified professional engineer, using \nperformance requirements and design criteria indicated. \n1.05 SUBMITTALS : \nA. General: Submit the following in accordance with SECTION 15050 - BASIC MECHANICAL \nMATERIALS AND METHODS. \nB. Product Data: For each type of the following: 1. Piping specialties. \n2. Corrugated, stainless-steel tubing with associated components. \n3. Valves. Include pressure rating, capacity, settings, and electrical connection data of \nselected models. \n4. Pressure regulators. Indicate pressure ratings and capacities. \nC. Qualification Data: For qu alified professional engineer. \nD. Welding certificates. \nE. Field quality-control reports. \nF. Operation and Maintenance Data: For motorize d gas valves and pressure regulators to include \nin emergency, operation, and maintenance manuals. \n1.06 QUALITY ASSURANCE\n: \nA. Steel Support Welding Qualifications: Qu alify procedures and personnel according to \nAWS D1.1/D1.1M. \nB. Pipe Welding Qualifications: Qualify procedur es and operators according to ASME Boiler and \nPressure Vessel Code. \nC. Electrical Components, Devices, and Accessories: Listed and labeled as defined in NFPA 70, \nby a qualified testing agency, and marked for intended location and application. \n1.07 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING : \nA. Handling Flammable Liquids: Remove and dispo se of liquids from existing natural-gas piping \naccording to requirements of authorities having jurisdiction. \nB. Deliver pipes and tubes with factory-applied e nd caps. Maintain end caps through shipping, \nstorage, and handling to prevent pipe end damage and to prevent entrance of dirt, debris, and \nmoisture. \nC. Store and handle pipes and tubes having factory- applied protective coatings to avoid damaging \ncoating, and protect from direct sunlight. SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \nBUCKLEY AFB 15195-4 06/09/09 D. Protect stored PE pipes and valves from direct sunlight. \n1.08 PROJECT CONDITIONS\n: \nA. Perform site survey, research public utility records, and verify existing utility locations. Contact utility-locating service for area where Project is located. \nB. Interruption of Existing Natural-Gas Service: Do not interrupt natural-gas service to facilities occupied by Owner or others unless permitted under the following conditions and then only \nafter arranging to provide purging and startup of natural-gas supply according to requirements indicated: 1. Notify Contracting Officer no fewer than two da ys in advance of proposed interruption of \nnatural-gas service. \n2. Do not proceed with interruption of natural-gas service without Contracting Officer \nwritten permission. \n1.09 COORDINATION\n: \nA. Coordinate sizes and locations of concre te bases with actual equipment provided. \nB. Coordinate requirements for access panels a nd doors for valves installed concealed behind \nfinished surfaces. Comply with requirements in DIVISION 8. \nPART 2 - PRODUCTS \n2.01 PIPES, TUBES, AND FITTINGS : \nA. Steel Pipe: ASTM A53/A53M, black steel, Schedule 40, Type E or S, Grade B. \n1. Wrought-Steel Welding Fittings: ASTM A234/A234M for butt welding and socket welding. \n2. Forged-Steel Flanges and Flanged Fittings: ASME B16.5, minimum Class 150, \nincluding bolts, nuts, and gaskets of the fo llowing material group, end connections, and \nfacings: \na. Material Group: 1.1. \nb. End Connections: Butt welding to match pipe. \nc. Lapped Face: Not permitted underground. \nd. Gasket Materials: ASME B16.20, metallic, flat, asbestos free, aluminum o-rings, and spiral-wound metal gaskets. \ne. Bolts and Nuts: ASME B18.2.1, carbon steel aboveground and stainless steel \nunderground. \n3. Mechanical Couplings: \na. Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, provide products by one \nof the following: \n(1) Dresser Piping Specialties; Division of Dresser, Inc. \n(2) Smith-Blair, Inc. \nb. Steel flanges and tube with epoxy finish. \nc. Buna-nitrile seals. \nd. Steel bolts, washers, and nuts. \ne. Coupling shall be capable of joining PE pipe to PE pipe, steel pipe to PE pipe, or steel pipe to steel pipe. \nf. Steel body couplings installed underground on plastic pipe shall be factory equipped \nwith anode. SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \n06/09/09 15195-5 BUCKELY AFB 2.02 PIPING SPECIALTIES\n: \nA. Appliance Flexible Connectors: 1. Indoor, Fixed-Appliance Flexible Connectors: Comply with ANSI Z21.24. \n2. Indoor, Movable-Appliance Flexible Connectors: Comply with ANSI Z21.69. \n3. Outdoor, Appliance Flexible Connectors: Comply with ANSI Z21.75. \n4. Corrugated stainless-steel tubing with polymer coating. \n5. Operating-Pressure Rating: 0.5 psig (3.45 kPa). \n6. End Fittings: Zinc-coated steel. \n7. Maximum Length: 72 inches (1830 mm). \nB. Y-Pattern Strainers: \n1. Body: ASTM A126, Class B, cast iron with bolted cover and bottom drain connection. \n2. End Connections: Threaded ends for NPS 2 (DN 50) and smaller; flanged ends for \nNPS 2-1/2 (DN 65) and larger. \n3. Strainer Screen: 40-mesh startup strainer, a nd perforated stainless-steel basket with 50% \nfree area. \n4. CWP Rating: 125 psig (862 kPa). \nC. Weatherproof Vent Cap: Cast- or malleable-i ron increaser fitting with corrosion-resistant wire \nscreen, with free area at least equal to cross- sectional area of connecting pipe and threaded-end \nconnection. \n2.03 JOINING MATERIALS\n: \nA. Joint Compound and Tape: Suitable for natural gas. \nB. Welding Filler Metals: Comply with AWS D10.12/D10.12M for welding materials \nappropriate for wall thickness and chemical analysis of steel pipe being welded. \n2.04 MANUAL GAS SHUTOFF VALVES : \nA. See \"Underground Manual Gas Shutoff Valv e Schedule\" and \"Aboveground Manual Gas \nShutoff Valve Schedule\" Articles for where each valve type is applied in various services. \nB. General Requirements for Metallic Valves, N PS 2 (DN 50) and Smaller: Comply with \nASME B16.33. \n1. CWP Rating: 125 psig (862 kPa). \n2. Dryseal Threads on Flare Ends: Comply with ASME B1.20.3. \n3. Tamperproof Feature: Locking feature for valves indicated in \"Underground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve Schedule\" and \"Aboveground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve Schedule\" \nArticles. \n4. Listing: Listed and labeled by an NRTL acceptable to authorities having jurisdiction for \nvalves 1 inch (25 mm) and smaller. \n5. Service Mark: Valves 1-1/4-inches (32-mm) to NPS 2 (DN 50) shall have initials \n\"WOG\" permanently marked on valve body. \nC. General Requirements for Metallic Valves, NPS 2-1/2 (DN 65) and Larger: Comply with \nASME B16.38. \n1. CWP Rating: 125 psig (862 kPa). \n2. Flanged Ends: Comply with ASME B16.5 for steel flanges. \n3. Tamperproof Feature: Locking feature for valves indicated in \"Underground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve Schedule\" and \"Aboveground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve Schedule\" \nArticles. \n4. Service Mark: Initials \"WOG\" shall be permanently marked on valve body. \nD. One-Piece, Bronze Ball Valve with Bronze Trim: MSS SP-110. SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \nBUCKLEY AFB 15195-6 06/09/09 1. Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, provide products by one of the following: a. Conbraco Industries, Inc.; Apollo Div. \nb. Perfection Corporation; a subsidiary of American Meter Company. \n2. Body: Bronze, complying with ASTM B584. \n3. Ball: Chrome-plated brass. \n4. Stem: Bronze; blowout proof. \n5. Seats: Reinforced TFE; blowout proof. \n6. Packing: Separate packnut with adjustable-stem packing threaded ends. \n7. Ends: Threaded, flared, or socket as i ndicated in \"Underground Manual Gas Shutoff \nValve Schedule\" and \"Above ground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve Schedule\" Articles. \n8. CWP Rating: 600 psig (4140 kPa). \n9. Listing: Valves NPS 1 (DN 25) and smalle r shall be listed and labeled by an NRTL \nacceptable to authorities having jurisdiction. \n10. Service: Suitable for natural-gas service with \"WOG\" indicated on valve body. \nE. Bronze Plug Valves: MSS SP-78. \n1. Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, provide products by one of the \nfollowing: a. Lee Brass Company. \n2. Body: Bronze, complying with ASTM B584. \n3. Plug: Bronze. \n4. Ends: Threaded, socket, or flanged as indicated in \"Underground Manual Gas Shutoff \nValve Schedule\" and \"Above ground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve Schedule\" Articles. \n5. Operator: Square head or lug type with tamperproof feature where indicated. \n6. Pressure Class: 125 psig (862 kPa). \n7. Listing: Valves NPS 1 (DN 25) and smalle r shall be listed and labeled by an NRTL \nacceptable to authorities having jurisdiction. \n8. Service: Suitable for natural-gas service with \"WOG\" indicated on valve body. \nF. Cast-Iron, Lubricated Plug Valves: MSS SP-78. \n1. Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, provide products by one of the following: \na. Flowserve. \nb. Mueller Co.; Gas Products Div. \nc. R&M Energy Systems, A Unit of Robbins & Myers, Inc. \n2. Body: Cast iron, complying with ASTM A126, Class B. \n3. Plug: Bronze or nickel-plated cast iron. \n4. Seat: Coated with thermoplastic. \n5. Stem Seal: Compatible with natural gas. \n6. Ends: Threaded or flanged as indicated in \"Underground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve \nSchedule\" and \"Aboveground Manual Gas Shutoff Valve Schedule\" Articles. \n7. Operator: Square head or lug type with tamperproof feature where indicated. \n8. Pressure Class: 125 psig (862 kPa). \n9. Listing: Valves NPS 1 (DN 25) and smalle r shall be listed and labeled by an NRTL \nacceptable to authorities having jurisdiction. \n10. Service: Suitable for natural-gas service with \"WOG\" indicated on valve body. \n2.05 MOTORIZED GAS VALVES\n: \nA. Electrically Operated Valves: Comply with UL 429. SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \n06/09/09 15195-7 BUCKELY AFB 1. Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, provide products by one of the following: a. ASCO Power Technologies, LP; Division of Emerson. \nb. Eclipse Combustion, Inc. \nc. Goyen Valve Corp.; Tyco Environmental Systems. \nd. Magnatrol Valve Corporation. \ne. Parker Hannifin Corporation; Climate & Industrial Controls Group; Skinner Valve Div. \nf. Watts Regulator Co.; Division of Watts Water Technologies, Inc. \n2. Pilot operated. \n3. Body: Brass or aluminum. \n4. Seats and Disc: Nitrile rubber. \n5. Springs and Valve Trim: Stainless steel. \n6. 120-V ac, 60 Hz, Class B, continuous-duty molded coil, and replaceable. \n7. NEMA ICS 6, Type 4, coil enclosure. \n8. Normally closed. \n9. Visual position indicator. \n2.06 PRESSURE REGULATORS\n: \nA. General Requirements: 1. Single stage and suitable for natural gas. \n2. Steel jacket and corrosion-resistant components. \n3. Elevation compensator. \n4. End Connections: Threaded for regulators NPS 2 (DN 50) and smaller; flanged for \nregulators NPS 2-1/2 (DN 65) and larger. \nB. Appliance Pressure Regulators: Comply with ANSI Z21.18. 1. Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, provide products by one of the following: \na. Canadian Meter Company Inc. \nb. Eaton Corporation; Controls Div. \nc. Harper Wyman Co. \nd. Maxitrol Company. \ne. SCP, Inc. \n2. Body and Diaphragm Case: Die-cast aluminum. \n3. Springs: Zinc-plated steel; interchangeable. \n4. Diaphragm Plate: Zinc-plated steel. \n5. Seat Disc: Nitrile rubber. \n6. Seal Plug: Ultraviolet-stabilized, mineral-filled nylon. \n7. Factory-Applied Finish: Minimum three-layer polyester and polyurethane paint finish. \n8. Regulator may include vent limiting device, instead of vent connection, if approved by \nauthorities having jurisdiction. \n9. Maximum Inlet Pressure: 2 psig (13.8 kPa). \n2.07 LABELING AND IDENTIFYING\n: \nA. Detectable Warning Tape: Acid- and alkali-resistant, PE film warning tape manufactured for marking and identifying underground utilities, a minimum of 6 inches (150 mm) wide and 4 \nmils (0.1 mm) thick, continuously inscribed w ith a description of utility, with metallic core SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \nBUCKLEY AFB 15195-8 06/09/09 encased in a protective jacket for corrosion protec tion, detectable by metal detector when tape \nis buried up to 30 inches (750 mm) deep; colored yellow. \nPART 3 - \n EXECUTION \n3.01 EXAMINATION : \nA. Examine roughing-in for natural-gas piping system to verify actual locations of piping connections before equipment installation. \nB. Proceed with installation only after unsa tisfactory conditions have been corrected. \n3.02 PREPARATION\n: \nA. Close equipment shutoff valves before turning o ff natural gas to premises or piping section. \nB. Inspect natural-gas piping according to NFPA 54 and the International Fuel Gas Code to \ndetermine that natural-gas utilization devices are turned off in piping section affected. \nC. Comply with NFPA 54 and the International Fu el Gas Code requirements for prevention of \naccidental ignition. \n3.03 INDOOR PIPING INSTALLATION : \nA. Comply with NFPA 54 and the International Fu el Gas Code for installation and purging of \nnatural-gas piping. \nB. Drawing plans, schematics, and diagrams indi cate general location and arrangement of piping \nsystems. Indicated locations and arrangements ar e used to size pipe and calculate friction loss, \nexpansion, and other design considerations. Install piping as indicated unless deviations to \nlayout are approved on Coordination Drawings. \nC. Arrange for pipe spaces, chases, slots, sleeves, and openings in building structure during \nprogress of construction, to allow for mechanical installations. \nD. Install piping in concealed locations unless otherwise indicated and except in equipment rooms and service areas. \nE. Install piping indicated to be exposed and piping in equipment rooms and service areas at right angles or parallel to building walls. Diagonal ru ns are prohibited unless specifically indicated \notherwise. \nF. Install piping above accessible ceilings to a llow sufficient space for ceiling panel removal. \nG. Locate valves for easy access. \nH. Install natural-gas piping at uniform grade of 2 percent down toward drip and sediment traps. \nI. Install piping free of sags and bends. \nJ. Install fittings for changes in direction and branch connections. \nK. Fire-Barrier Penetrations: Maintain indicated fire rating of walls, partitions, ceilings, and \nfloors at pipe penetrations. Seal pipe penetrations with firestop materials. Comply with requirements in DIVISION 7. \nL. Verify final equipment locations for roughing-in. \nM. Comply with requirements in Sections speci fying gas-fired appliances and equipment for \nroughing-in requirements. \nN. Drips and Sediment Traps: Install drips at points where condensate may collect, including service-meter outlets. Locate where accessible to permit cleaning and emptying. Do not \ninstall where condensate is subject to freezing. 1. Construct drips and sediment traps using tee fitting with bottom outlet plugged or capped. Use nipple a minimum length of 3 pipe diameters, but not less than 3 inches (75 mm) SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \n06/09/09 15195-9 BUCKELY AFB long and same size as connected pipe. Insta ll with space below bottom of drip to remove \nplug or cap. \nO. Extend relief vent connections for service re gulators, line regulators, and overpressure \nprotection devices to outdoors and terminate with weatherproof vent cap. \nP. Conceal pipe installations in walls, pipe sp aces, utility spaces, above ceilings, below grade or \nfloors, and in floor channels unless indicated to be exposed to view. \nQ. Concealed Location Installations: Except as specified below, install concealed natural-gas piping and piping installed under the building in containment conduit constr ucted of steel pipe \nwith welded joints as described in Part 2. Install a vent pipe from containment conduit to \noutdoors and terminate with weatherproof vent cap. \n1. Above Accessible Ceilings: Natural-gas piping , fittings, valves, and regulators may be \ninstalled in accessible spaces without containment conduit. \n2. In Walls or Partitions: Protect tubing inst alled inside partitions or hollow walls from \nphysical damage using steel striker barriers at rigid supports. \na. Exception: Tubing passing through parti tions or walls does not require striker \nbarriers. \n3. Prohibited Locations: a. Do not install natural-gas piping in or through circulating air ducts, clothes or trash chutes, chimneys or gas vents (flues), ventilating ducts, or dumbwaiter or elevator shafts. \nb. Do not install natural-gas piping in solid walls or partitions. \nR. Use eccentric reducer fittings to make reductions in pipe sizes. Install fittings with level side \ndown. \nS. Connect branch piping from top or side of horizontal piping. \nT. Install unions in pipes NPS 2 (DN 50) and smalle r, adjacent to each valve, at final connection \nto each piece of equipment. Unions are not required at flanged connections. \nU. Do not use natural-gas piping as grounding electrode. \nV. Install strainer on inlet of each line-pressure regulator and automatic or electrically operated valve. \nW. Install pressure gauge upstream and downstream from each line regulator. Pressure gauges are \nspecified in SECTION 15122 - METERS AND GAUGES. \n3.04 VALVE INSTALLATION\n: \nA. Install manual gas shutoff valve for each gas appliance ahead of corrugated stainless-steel \ntubing, aluminum, or copper connector. \nB. Install regulators and overpressure protection devices with maintenance access space adequate \nfor servicing and testing. \n3.05 PIPING JOINT CONSTRUCTION : \nA. Ream ends of pipes and tubes and remove burrs. \nB. Remove scale, slag, dirt, and debris from insi de and outside of pipe and fittings before \nassembly. \nC. Threaded Joints: \n1. Thread pipe with tapered pipe threads complying with ASME B1.20.1. \n2. Cut threads full and clean using sharp dies. \n3. Ream threaded pipe ends to remove burrs and restore full inside diameter of pipe. \n4. Apply appropriate tape or thread compound to external pipe threads unless dryseal \nthreading is specified. SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \nBUCKLEY AFB 15195-10 06/09/09 5. Damaged Threads: Do not use pipe or pipe fittings with threads that are corroded or damaged. Do not use pipe sections that have cracked or open welds. \nD. Welded Joints: 1. Construct joints according to AWS D1 0.12/D10.12M, using qualified processes and \nwelding operators. \n2. Bevel plain ends of steel pipe. \n3. Patch factory-applied protective coating as recommended by manufacturer at field welds and where damage to coating occurs during construction. \n3.06 HANGER AND SUPPORT INSTALLATION\n: \nA. Install seismic restraints on piping. Comply with requirements for seismic-restraint devices specified in SECTION 15071 - MECHANICAL VIBRATION AND SEISMIC CONTROLS. \nB. Comply with requirements for pipe hangers and supports specified in SECTION 15060 - HANGERS AND SUPPORTS \nC. Install hangers for horizontal steel piping with the following maximum spacing and minimum \nrod sizes: 1. NPS 1 (DN 25) and Smaller: Maximum span, 96 inches (2438 mm); minimum rod size, \n3/8-inch (10-mm). \n2. NPS 1-1/4 (DN 32): Maximum span, 108 inches (2743 mm); minimum rod size, 3/8-inch \n(10-mm). \n3. NPS 1-1/2 and NPS 2 (DN 40 and DN 50): Maximum span, 108 inches (2743 mm); minimum rod size, 3/8-inch (10-mm). \n4. NPS 2-1/2 to NPS 3-1/2 (DN 65 to DN 90): Maximum span, 10 feet (3 m); minimum rod \nsize, 1/2-inch (13-mm). \n3.07 CONNECTIONS\n: \nA. Connect to utility's gas main according to utility's procedures and requirements. \nB. Install natural-gas piping electrically con tinuous, and bonded to gas appliance equipment \ngrounding conductor of the circuit powering the appliance according to NFPA 70. \nC. Install piping adjacent to appliances to allow service and maintenance of appliances. \nD. Connect piping to appliances using manual gas s hutoff valves and unions. Install valve within \n72 inches (1800 mm) of each gas-fired appliance and equipment. Install union between valve \nand appliances or equipment. \nE. Sediment Traps: Install tee fitting with capped nipple in bottom to form drip, as close as practical to inlet of each appliance. \n3.08 LABELING AND IDENTIFYING\n: \nA. Comply with requirements in SECTION 15075 - MECHANICAL IDENTIFICATION for piping and valve identification. \nB. Install detectable warning tape directly above gas piping, 12 inches (300 mm) below finished grade, except 6 inches (150 mm) below subgrade under pavements and slabs. \n3.09 PAINTING\n: \nA. Comply with requirements in DIVISION 9 for painting interior and exterior natural-gas piping. \nB. Paint exposed, exterior metal piping, valves, ser vice regulators, service meters and meter bars, \nearthquake valves, and piping specialties, except components, with factory-applied paint or \nprotective coating. 1. Alkyd System: MPI EXT 5.1D. SECTION 15195 REPAIR WING HEADQUARTERS, BLDG 706 \nFACILITY NATURAL-GAS PIPING CRWU 06-2071 \n \n06/09/09 15195-11 BUCKELY AFB a. Prime Coat: Alkyd anticorrosive metal primer. \nb. Intermediate Coat: Exterior alkyd enamel matching topcoat. \nc. Topcoat: Exterior alkyd enamel (flat). \nd. Color: Gray. \nC. Damage and Touchup: Repair marred and damaged factory-applied finishes with materials and by procedures to match original factory finish. \n3.10 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL\n: \nA. Perform tests and inspections. \nB. Tests and Inspections: 1. Test, inspect, and purge natural gas according to NFPA 54 and the International Fuel Gas \nCode and authorities having jurisdiction. \nC. Natural-gas piping will be considered defective if it does not pass tests and inspections. \nD. Prepare test and inspection reports. \n3.11 DEMONSTRATION\n: \nA. Engage a factory-authorized service representative to train Owner's maintenance personnel to adjust, operate, and maintain earthquake valves. \n3.12 INDOOR PIPING SCHEDULE FOR SYSTEM PRESSURES MORE THAN 0.5 PSIG (3.45 \nKPA) AND LESS THAN 5 PSIG (34.5 KPA) : \nA. Aboveground, branch piping NPS 2 (DN 50) and smaller shall be the following: 1. Steel pipe with malleable-iron fittings and threaded joints. \nB. Aboveground, distribution piping shall be the following: 1. Steel pipe with malleable-iron fittings and threaded joints. \n3.13 ABOVEGROUND MANUAL GAS SHUTOFF VALVE SCHEDULE\n: \nA. Valves for pipe sizes NPS 2 (DN 50) and smaller at service meter shall be one of the following: 1. One-piece, bronze ball valve with bronze trim. \n2. Bronze plug valve. \nB. Valves in branch piping for single appliance shall be one of the following: 1. One-piece, bronze ball valve with bronze trim. \n2. Bronze plug valve. \n END OF SECTION 15195 \n \n " }

[ 0.007406727410852909, 0.02419150434434414, -0.010545913130044937, -0.04090201482176781, 0.04699261114001274, 0.0470290407538414, 0.027014056220650673, 0.006906590890139341, -0.06395194679498672, -0.07340945303440094, 0.11479327827692032, -0.0028213877230882645, -0.05440473183989525, -0.007755428086966276, -0.024590497836470604, -0.091742143034935, 0.14979864656925201, -0.02184261381626129, -0.07575805485248566, -0.01962371915578842, -0.018139969557523727, 0.06670814752578735, 0.03727967292070389, 0.01493709348142147, -0.07041435688734055, -0.03105352632701397, -0.00411973986774683, -0.013132093474268913, 0.0041116587817668915, 0.012775192968547344, 0.028552204370498657, -0.015252274461090565, 0.06049417331814766, 0.002624506363645196, 0.02204884961247444, -0.01686880737543106, 0.04540052264928818, -0.06905428320169449, 0.07664445787668228, 0.0050927442498505116, -0.011593298986554146, -0.08987634629011154, -0.008495417423546314, 0.025582075119018555, -0.021979650482535362, 0.024378634989261627, -0.0556439533829689, -0.1413571983575821, -0.07941433042287827, -0.039816200733184814, -0.03018517792224884, -0.00825158879160881, 0.04325885325670242, -0.0554627850651741, -0.00025460831238888204, -0.02722255140542984, -0.01958436705172062, -0.10368143767118454, -0.046407993882894516, 0.0953356921672821, -0.02362150140106678, -0.08145139366388321, -0.01885770633816719, -0.0008674710406921804, 0.012157680466771126, 0.022606326267123222, -0.021588483825325966, -0.07703592628240585, 0.02281348966062069, -0.04912296682596207, -0.007626398000866175, -0.04404482990503311, 0.04224295914173126, 0.02501729130744934, -0.00446625892072916, 0.11200355738401413, 0.013903835788369179, 0.02943827584385872, 0.13395166397094727, -0.06438393890857697, -0.014081330969929695, -0.004833786282688379, 0.0776190236210823, 0.017247619107365608, -0.00544667849317193, 0.0232032909989357, -0.04598471149802208, 0.03109269216656685, -0.0065776812843978405, 0.004039554391056299, 0.07938402146100998, -0.07065214216709137, 0.11707098037004471, 0.04277580603957176, -0.02587498538196087, 0.03921658545732498, -0.07855642586946487, -0.11821973323822021, 0.004643672611564398, 0.010355130769312382, -0.05979008600115776, -0.016214022412896156, -0.03128926455974579, 0.043171364814043045, -0.017965978011488914, -0.038865815848112106, 0.015285605564713478, 0.0026079665403813124, -0.0015848816838115454, 0.05750751867890358, -0.01587017998099327, 0.08935924619436264, 0.007289430592209101, -0.0017555593512952328, -0.0971762165427208, -0.0013386377831920981, 0.03515102341771126, -0.018733669072389603, 0.0511191263794899, -0.047837547957897186, -0.03291909024119377, 0.004395083989948034, 0.008017224259674549, -0.016876446083188057, 0.011694515123963356, 0.04989013820886612, 0.00278857396915555, 2.393996917534293e-33, -0.06465709209442139, 0.0024298878852277994, 0.04817995801568031, -0.05083569139242172, 0.032936036586761475, -0.005182600114494562, -0.07144767791032791, -0.049314696341753006, 0.14176809787750244, 0.009690270759165287, 0.031693704426288605, -0.03026621788740158, -0.03844866901636124, -0.014570317231118679, -0.07878215610980988, 0.0466817170381546, -0.00765283964574337, 0.0071174381300807, -0.05813845619559288, -0.052971430122852325, -0.011941253207623959, -0.0776660144329071, 0.043022140860557556, -0.04198085889220238, -0.0179021917283535, 0.0011459850938990712, -0.08405793458223343, -0.05135738104581833, 0.05585658922791481, 0.048844799399375916, 0.010033227503299713, -0.08901010453701019, 0.006866311188787222, 0.026134006679058075, -0.03975318372249603, 0.034683775156736374, -0.02778654359281063, -0.007017519790679216, -0.04913284629583359, -0.047040536999702454, -0.025554129853844643, 0.08533816784620285, 0.08631603419780731, 0.07915464788675308, 0.07185905426740646, 0.01673826389014721, 0.0017026730347424746, 0.04357753321528435, 0.00199698144569993, 0.02495296485722065, -0.0446910485625267, -0.06995350122451782, -0.07838885486125946, 0.0014674576232209802, -0.031727325171232224, -0.04121800884604454, 0.01067147497087717, 0.028007548302412033, 0.014307752251625061, -0.06368876993656158, -0.016360951587557793, 0.1360514760017395, -0.049288004636764526, -0.011412002146244049, 0.026983613148331642, -0.005833902396261692, -0.0413292795419693, -0.07922257483005524, -0.01059689000248909, 0.04926333576440811, 0.07324747741222382, -0.04628250002861023, -0.011509289033710957, 0.036824893206357956, -0.08533649891614914, -0.03979887068271637, -0.01599952019751072, 0.026412222534418106, 0.052376680076122284, -0.02547507919371128, 0.0724756047129631, 0.005553657654672861, -0.05217364430427551, 0.03404853492975235, -0.028676321730017662, -0.022241486236453056, -0.06019412726163864, -0.050148140639066696, 0.04282701388001442, 0.06315504014492035, 0.03767320513725281, 0.05310674011707306, 0.020638441666960716, 0.07896346598863602, -0.08618659526109695, -4.2793993064540305e-33, -0.029460057616233826, 0.01676059328019619, -0.008000443689525127, 0.03498751297593117, -0.002698057098314166, -0.04196404665708542, -0.0035398860927671194, -0.07204633206129074, 0.06514269858598709, -0.06745104491710663, 0.005481373053044081, 0.04504471644759178, 0.02153882011771202, -0.03226546570658684, -0.02579633519053459, 0.008444241248071194, 0.023847060278058052, 0.061375439167022705, -0.023839714005589485, -0.031030796468257904, -0.035409752279520035, 0.0407983735203743, -0.07880853116512299, 0.07269057631492615, -0.03914188593626022, 0.0833873376250267, 0.06721489876508713, 0.011156582273542881, -0.0412171445786953, -0.04058253392577171, -0.0376778244972229, 0.0011621162993833423, 0.026562536135315895, -0.014071106910705566, -0.026852145791053772, -0.11506523191928864, 0.10069971531629562, -0.02812216617166996, -0.043955761939287186, -0.028471535071730614, 0.034798674285411835, 0.0011232136748731136, -0.06284523755311966, 0.12056272476911545, -0.04287920147180557, 0.03548700734972954, 0.03962649777531624, -0.07078821212053299, 0.046366386115550995, 0.08042023330926895, -0.06033420190215111, -0.04679851606488228, -0.02714044786989689, -0.019021883606910706, -0.020479947328567505, 0.05686839669942856, 0.03425350412726402, -0.07043441385030746, -0.05838024988770485, -0.0006874588434584439, 0.040723767131567, 0.16041135787963867, -0.02844550460577011, 0.034241851419210434, 0.05962313339114189, 0.0034268200397491455, -0.011138987727463245, -0.003187808906659484, 0.0471264012157917, -0.09601278603076935, 0.0024122956674546003, 0.03384740650653839, -0.03934977203607559, -0.10552772134542465, -0.09889044612646103, -0.053067222237586975, 0.020662203431129456, -0.016436930745840073, 0.020512569695711136, -0.024841340258717537, 0.008876962587237358, -0.004715548362582922, -0.0770258903503418, 0.10976383835077286, 0.022605007514357567, -0.005764891393482685, 0.00845972541719675, -0.004505140241235495, 0.03724275156855583, 0.08310047537088394, -0.046795230358839035, 0.029311487451195717, -0.02291552536189556, 0.09712988883256912, 0.042529307305812836, -4.733488268016117e-8, 0.06409794092178345, -0.039951082319021225, -0.0268670953810215, 0.04623176530003548, -0.0024654685985296965, 0.021213406696915627, -0.09812304377555847, -0.036298587918281555, 0.006284690462052822, 0.11956344544887543, -0.022379115223884583, 0.13176248967647552, -0.10629288852214813, -0.023542003706097603, -0.053668249398469925, -0.05630987510085106, 0.013754993677139282, 0.030554544180631638, -0.072995625436306, 0.05052104964852333, -0.04107741266489029, 0.0038874666206538677, 0.08500759303569794, -0.03137756139039993, 0.011028323322534561, -0.06346525251865387, 0.0391019769012928, 0.0711977407336235, 0.061808500438928604, 0.014687269926071167, -0.030525395646691322, 0.02819923870265484, 0.023295000195503235, 0.1033100038766861, -0.01261106412857771, -0.05424822121858597, -0.05786263942718506, 0.00867188535630703, 0.0164270531386137, -0.005753172095865011, -0.05966862663626671, -0.021976877003908157, -0.04263537749648094, 0.01460746955126524, -0.018432417884469032, 0.015183418989181519, -0.04473988339304924, 0.036566030234098434, -0.0089635718613863, 0.039368193596601486, -0.029992124065756798, -0.03459096699953079, 0.0708785355091095, 0.07235559076070786, -0.05292560160160065, 0.03948475793004036, 0.04456017166376114, -0.03155013918876648, 0.03125672787427902, -0.0018712998135015368, 0.0453810840845108, -0.07305008918046951, 0.019156353548169136, -0.003069422673434019 ]

{ "pdf_file": "NLTWEZWPUW2XAJ5PPIKQTT6A62AWCH4T.pdf", "text": "Dear Dr. Henney, \n1x1 All GE Foods should be labeled so I am \ninformed and have a choice. Commissioner Jane Henney \na GE Foods $h&% r& be’f-&!umf$tlyo ti \n“generally recognized as safe” and should A $“k$-;;;P,“,;;z;;g;nt Branch \nhave mandatory pre-market safety testing (HFA-305) \nI$ There should be a moratorium on GE 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 \nFoods until long-term studies show they are \nsafe for human health and the environment. Rockville MD 20852 \\ \nT+I_EC_E~TRR FOR \nFOOD SAFETY \nOOP-1211 c rs " }

[ -0.04375419393181801, -0.013767278753221035, 0.018209248781204224, 0.1159224808216095, 0.05651591718196869, 0.08760347962379456, -0.05418708920478821, -0.018865305930376053, -0.0884580910205841, -0.004229467827826738, 0.07137863337993622, -0.09799585491418839, 0.02485710009932518, -0.05264861509203911, 0.011328384280204773, 0.03643012419342995, 0.07752162963151932, 0.00785087700933218, -0.04876105859875679, 0.03795287013053894, 0.014225737191736698, -0.014145066030323505, 0.02197778970003128, -0.10175253450870514, 0.02796776592731476, 0.03778638318181038, -0.04023789241909981, -0.005058117210865021, 0.0277902502566576, 0.0012418304104357958, 0.03631230443716049, -0.03239954262971878, 0.011494474485516548, 0.01769188418984413, 0.1421421468257904, 0.056847985833883286, 0.03283241018652916, 0.07372457534074783, -0.009463259018957615, -0.0064563569612801075, -0.00893991906195879, -0.0023721924517303705, 0.01203354075551033, -0.06266357004642487, -0.06814302504062653, -0.03042479045689106, -0.09634336829185486, -0.04522356390953064, 0.0021575638093054295, 0.03375003859400749, 0.048374492675065994, 0.05937013030052185, -0.011701967567205429, 0.08393988758325577, -0.04950837418437004, -0.025655196979641914, -0.001711218967102468, 0.02137596718966961, -0.06225471943616867, -0.03084327094256878, 0.0230097733438015, 0.10161332786083221, -0.03723246604204178, -0.006448883097618818, -0.039683278650045395, 0.013452641665935516, -0.009708520025014877, 0.03977617621421814, 0.10096532106399536, -0.10341471433639526, -0.048902515321969986, 0.04334565997123718, 0.01888357661664486, 0.00019519713532645255, 0.04300718009471893, 0.032199688255786896, 0.06540495902299881, 0.045333534479141235, 0.12272785604000092, -0.030431712046265602, -0.03036876767873764, -0.011094839312136173, -0.06643781065940857, 0.007885250262916088, -0.13219158351421356, -0.0010247575119137764, -0.0834384486079216, 0.037546347826719284, 0.021559027954936028, -0.008158128708600998, 0.043752264231443405, 0.016739115118980408, -0.012937027961015701, -0.023518314585089684, 0.015855256468057632, -0.05541667342185974, -0.014385483227670193, -0.01310453750193119, -0.018139103427529335, 0.010219334624707699, -0.0116806011646986, -0.08318430185317993, 0.04144588112831116, -0.03515118733048439, 0.00047721367445774376, -0.10309776663780212, 0.00774379400536418, 0.025075677782297134, -0.035272691398859024, -0.02012830227613449, 0.004920988343656063, -0.030812839046120644, 0.00480838306248188, -0.046049248427152634, -0.03165483474731445, -0.0076074786484241486, -0.03355208784341812, -0.03283960744738579, 0.09588240832090378, -0.0474502369761467, -0.0011296469019725919, 0.061339203268289566, 0.012273643165826797, -0.10377290099859238, 0.009028129279613495, -0.02905954420566559, -0.022100001573562622, 1.3398353670965544e-32, -0.000992553192190826, -0.010064464993774891, 0.03466104343533516, 0.07636477798223495, 0.023880526423454285, -0.03281373158097267, -0.01097879558801651, -0.0188380628824234, 0.044949986040592194, 0.02912450022995472, -0.030789373442530632, 0.029735637828707695, 0.03973115608096123, -0.019084030762314796, -0.06144236400723457, -0.03474164009094238, 0.01548144780099392, 0.02596745267510414, -0.09844103455543518, 0.046692781150341034, 0.013504743576049805, 0.0283143799751997, 0.05275889113545418, 0.05168822035193443, 0.03051234409213066, -0.057409271597862244, -0.037335362285375595, 0.0304036233574152, -0.04329574853181839, 0.011087261140346527, -0.010426689870655537, 0.00817944761365652, 0.059683024883270264, -0.0828094333410263, 0.01570165902376175, 0.04690593108534813, 0.06867711991071701, 0.012331120669841766, -0.06592389196157455, -0.1404556930065155, -0.05268113687634468, -0.005667833145707846, 0.07151433825492859, 0.03255562484264374, 0.03730965778231621, -0.015612875111401081, 0.07876759767532349, -0.08035826683044434, -0.00415214616805315, 0.0838683620095253, -0.002388563472777605, 0.016932068392634392, -0.1667134165763855, -0.040108464658260345, -0.09915731102228165, -0.04260538890957832, -0.05341702699661255, 0.00014774709416087717, 0.052738625556230545, 0.010564182884991169, 0.06508524715900421, -0.09684160351753235, 0.013692370615899563, -0.045233312994241714, 0.028004946187138557, -0.12201622873544693, -0.004462686367332935, -0.04610387235879898, 0.027444958686828613, 0.020318469032645226, -0.02305435761809349, 0.05103674530982971, 0.0742853656411171, -0.018428975716233253, 0.08413473516702652, 0.006469239015132189, 0.03390771150588989, -0.0033694510348141193, 0.0182451531291008, 0.005797392688691616, 0.06013137102127075, 0.004796502646058798, 0.0063414121977984905, 0.022123033180832863, 0.0652383416891098, -0.07034853100776672, -0.06655145436525345, 0.01633375883102417, -0.07661936432123184, -0.049807772040367126, -0.0014678881270810962, 0.029255837202072144, 0.02405044063925743, -0.08492203056812286, 0.022074561566114426, -1.402074266489542e-32, 0.010001488961279392, -0.004001612775027752, 0.057049721479415894, -0.11244085431098938, 0.0467536523938179, -0.0011258425656706095, -0.007800615392625332, -0.11517249047756195, 0.028969494625926018, -0.02504698373377323, -0.01805192045867443, -0.04313252121210098, 0.025285637006163597, 0.03503433242440224, -0.1253327876329422, 0.036123473197221756, -0.02022961899638176, -0.05403035879135132, 0.03078923001885414, 0.025615116581320763, -0.035455748438835144, 0.05667153000831604, -0.07070537656545639, 0.008155480027198792, 0.020220905542373657, 0.019306769594550133, -0.04792561009526253, 0.09256591647863388, 0.03372621536254883, 0.02637200616300106, 0.02211090549826622, -0.036873966455459595, 0.033349692821502686, 0.14820539951324463, -0.030904510989785194, -0.04523178189992905, 0.12683582305908203, -0.031634606420993805, -0.11087308824062347, -0.051715243607759476, 0.13250620663166046, -0.05488139018416405, -0.007663359399884939, -0.007113763131201267, 0.016592323780059814, 0.013604453764855862, -0.04523186385631561, -0.06576208770275116, -0.035728830844163895, 0.038971927016973495, 0.02534486912190914, -0.03067207522690296, -0.046495504677295685, 0.05472442880272865, 0.052911173552274704, 0.040773890912532806, -0.01865122653543949, -0.047871701419353485, -0.08705354481935501, 0.013339326716959476, 0.014659727923572063, 0.08593814820051193, -0.047003623098134995, 0.02508360520005226, 0.022939573973417282, -0.0785985216498375, -0.08389965444803238, -0.1256442815065384, -0.07717850804328918, -0.09294552356004715, -0.07594150304794312, -0.11239113658666611, -0.001779496786184609, -0.07909806817770004, -0.03359929844737053, -0.0202888622879982, 0.06625967472791672, -0.03543902933597565, -0.062383152544498444, 0.00847562588751316, -0.03412342444062233, -0.07415009289979935, 0.005623558536171913, -0.001791776972822845, -0.011828305199742317, 0.07956642657518387, 0.07720241695642471, 0.012318065389990807, -0.018427874892950058, 0.05966256558895111, -0.06392546743154526, -0.050014395266771317, 0.028105061501264572, 0.06114300340414047, 0.01420197356492281, -5.707844508151538e-8, 0.0820048600435257, 0.03712635487318039, -0.028421880677342415, -0.06263040006160736, 0.02488446608185768, 0.025148548185825348, 0.03321634978055954, 0.015318041667342186, -0.01964920572936535, 0.07691355049610138, 0.023507222533226013, 0.04315642639994621, -0.02606993168592453, -0.032051242887973785, 0.0068438402377069, -0.058384913951158524, -0.036756183952093124, -0.035258494317531586, -0.024192141368985176, 0.022646909579634666, -0.039043400436639786, -0.020947284996509552, -0.06092119961977005, 0.07471268624067307, 0.029011046513915062, 0.01803671009838581, -0.09157533943653107, 0.025589659810066223, 0.025713855400681496, 0.006084934808313847, 0.0487070195376873, 0.041716594249010086, -0.01841210201382637, -0.02817750722169876, -0.007025391329079866, -0.039708249270915985, 0.02644096501171589, -0.0027685321401804686, 0.02171950414776802, 0.04974367097020149, 0.040994830429553986, 0.034642912447452545, -0.05013008415699005, -0.009283690713346004, 0.04930872842669487, 0.037622470408678055, -0.023456184193491936, -0.04419463127851486, -0.017798442393541336, -0.030572662129998207, -0.07342392951250076, -0.06108839809894562, -0.011107871308922768, -0.009941743686795235, -0.000250728044193238, 0.05836008861660957, 0.004333775024861097, 0.02519572339951992, 0.06944753229618073, 0.03080984205007553, 0.03793127089738846, -0.004275145009160042, -0.04958420991897583, 0.03603971749544144 ]

{ "pdf_file": "FGZMCFJCVNCWGNVLKUGB27JTHYPUFTIA.pdf", "text": "24\n5\n204\n8 Clothing & Diapers 1\n13 Food Vouchers 8\n16Long Distance \nTransportation 0\n4Personal Grooming \nNeeds 0\n3Transportation \nPasses 5\n0\n0\n301501001\n1 2 4 0 7 4\n2 0 5 13 8 3\n3 0 6 2 Outside of DC 0\n122\n269\n19110DHS Weekly Shelter & Housing Occupancy Report\nfor Family Programs\nWeek of June 29 - July 5, 2008\nVirginia Williams Data\nShelter Hotline\nFamilies Applying for Shelter\nResources Provided to \nFamilies Applying for Shelter\nMediationServices Provided by VWFRC Number of families applying for \nShelter at Virginia Williams FRCNumber of families applying for Shelter at Virginia Williams that have applied for shelter before?\nNumber of families with temporary \nsleeping arrangements that are on the Pending Case List\nHousing Search Assistance\nCase/Care Management\nEmployment PreparationHow many inquiries \nfor family shelter were made after hours?\nComprehensive Information and \nReferrals\nTemporary Financial Assistance\nNumber of families Served in HUD Transitional ProgramsShelter & Housing Program Data\nNumber of families in temporary shelterDomestic Violence Shelter\nFaith Based HousingEntered Emergency Shelter\nIneligible for shelter/ Denial\nUnknown/Disappeared/No Contact\nNumber of families served in DHS Transitional programsHousing in a family member or friend's room/apartment\nTransitional HousingClosed cases- Number of families that have exited from receiving services \nat VWFRC\nWard Distribution of Families Served at IntakeOther \nPermanent HousingRescinded Application\nInformation generated for this report was pulled through the DC Homeless Management Information System" }

[ -0.006508396007120609, -0.025834383442997932, 0.06888830661773682, -0.02424742467701435, 0.013940597884356976, 0.0073249139823019505, -0.05253677815198898, -0.02948717772960663, -0.0068854279816150665, 0.026007171720266342, 0.06246758997440338, -0.004918821156024933, 0.012697335332632065, -0.021726127713918686, -0.021702827885746956, -0.02368009276688099, -0.007704058196395636, -0.043617524206638336, -0.08719521760940552, -0.006567530799657106, 0.0029768608510494232, -0.040211476385593414, -0.04454568773508072, -0.025787847116589546, 0.1156480610370636, -0.013921928592026234, -0.043344754725694656, -0.04677070304751396, -0.031364839524030685, 0.005399977322667837, 0.007927961647510529, 0.041977472603321075, -0.04446977376937866, -0.003516748547554016, 0.010380873456597328, -0.005248809698969126, 0.037364840507507324, 0.06017911061644554, 0.016244249418377876, -0.02283036895096302, -0.057342346757650375, -0.006603045854717493, 0.05187653377652168, 0.0456974096596241, -0.1063072606921196, -0.0399642288684845, -0.04955203831195831, -0.10617183148860931, -0.011622671037912369, 0.021907759830355644, 0.07064881175756454, -0.03629555553197861, 0.015064448118209839, 0.0332070030272007, -0.08680256456136703, 0.12733761966228485, 0.0370415523648262, -0.05991107225418091, -0.048203736543655396, 0.03282114863395691, -0.05796245113015175, 0.03419157862663269, 0.00546730263158679, -0.010071990080177784, -0.0628197118639946, -0.05167282745242119, 0.0286372359842062, -0.022432979196310043, 0.04871339723467827, -0.06130077317357063, 0.0015294032637029886, -0.01531082484871149, -0.0698993131518364, 0.02543039247393608, 0.18570905923843384, 0.01098759938031435, 0.021506082266569138, 0.1440618634223938, 0.05483366176486015, -0.06900588423013687, 0.07582113146781921, 0.033584173768758774, -0.09205959737300873, -0.08252351731061935, -0.06830888241529465, -0.020308151841163635, -0.0499410443007946, -0.025625333189964294, -0.0043535795994102955, 0.005936118774116039, 0.04865995794534683, -0.01233683992177248, 0.06638822704553604, -0.06423281878232956, 0.0411735475063324, -0.042435210198163986, -0.042895738035440445, -0.023311683908104897, 0.05961143225431442, 0.025863956660032272, -0.04244212806224823, 0.014768242835998535, -0.008673020638525486, -0.006678368896245956, -0.08707936108112335, -0.05473887920379639, 0.055962830781936646, -0.009761784225702286, 0.01514657586812973, -0.004321299958974123, 0.03844177722930908, -0.030388234183192253, -0.0018855161033570766, 0.020706335082650185, 0.0024742332752794027, 0.03126046061515808, -0.0256118755787611, -0.012546935118734837, 0.08869832009077072, -0.010101128369569778, 0.024552153423428535, 0.058114174753427505, -0.028022706508636475, -0.02836109697818756, -0.030083926394581795, -0.06341635435819626, -0.04869369789958, 7.909671530600793e-33, 0.07026594877243042, 0.10311941057443619, -0.03493102639913559, 0.06513353437185287, -0.049924351274967194, -0.07575131207704544, -0.01345892995595932, 0.05231206491589546, 0.02445835806429386, -0.05013620853424072, -0.03984308987855911, 0.12519988417625427, 0.009580245241522789, 0.03868850693106651, -0.00018601292686071247, 0.048015132546424866, -0.006161748897284269, 0.07325688749551773, 0.09335659444332123, 0.0725831538438797, 0.0564730204641819, -0.016696210950613022, 0.04174497723579407, -0.046956680715084076, -0.03843706101179123, 0.03555600717663765, -0.06865795701742172, 0.026532862335443497, 0.07000676542520523, -0.018150994554162025, -0.03913845866918564, -0.053867194801568985, -0.023279894143342972, 0.008691485039889812, 0.027673568576574326, 0.04839720204472542, 0.07422274351119995, -0.03701789677143097, 0.05361581966280937, -0.08836918324232101, 0.00497949356213212, 0.04928994178771973, -0.05189155042171478, 0.03718181699514389, 0.07853040844202042, -0.00196848320774734, 0.09850410372018814, -0.0469631664454937, 0.08753059059381485, 0.010124052874743938, 0.0005606062477454543, -0.0853569358587265, -0.04519353434443474, -0.1094614639878273, -0.06578084081411362, 0.00047163505223579705, -0.0001344961201539263, 0.04697149991989136, -0.045812733471393585, -0.09335803985595703, 0.031805619597435, 0.06351324915885925, -0.012921368703246117, -0.013860614039003849, -0.026943253353238106, -0.03375876322388649, -0.04589403420686722, -0.042348042130470276, 0.08384732902050018, -0.06970398873090744, -0.10001996159553528, -0.0560101717710495, -0.05526042729616165, 0.018807806074619293, 0.11049529165029526, -0.019088590517640114, -0.06418585777282715, -0.031625404953956604, 0.037241388112306595, -0.01669277995824814, 0.0017213149694725871, -0.02221204712986946, -0.05579451099038124, -0.0003757025406230241, 0.03651139512658119, 0.020297136157751083, 0.02999330498278141, 0.002778773894533515, 0.05222019925713539, 0.04010261222720146, 0.06634712964296341, 0.0026854139287024736, -0.008693932555615902, 0.11881165951490402, 0.12294664233922958, -9.395946751313323e-33, 0.06132088601589203, -0.001478028018027544, -0.01125080045312643, 0.0010415530996397138, 0.058860715478658676, -0.010059726424515247, 0.002531318226829171, 0.031092464923858643, 0.06777246296405792, -0.10424213111400604, 0.008028563112020493, 0.007746533490717411, -0.022229040041565895, 0.0037165451794862747, -0.06526340544223785, -0.027589065954089165, 0.017505748197436333, 0.03673297166824341, -0.04447039216756821, -0.00508661475032568, 0.07677517831325531, 0.02571117877960205, -0.009102297015488148, -0.01986887864768505, 0.030588330700993538, -0.05129241198301315, 0.04019635543227196, 0.0047287591733038425, -0.008672818541526794, 0.016133369877934456, 0.034439925104379654, 0.008493904955685139, -0.02501947246491909, 0.005148501601070166, -0.053225938230752945, -0.013571279123425484, 0.019400961697101593, 0.07494239509105682, -0.09989774227142334, 0.06046502664685249, 0.012525856494903564, -0.07534767687320709, -0.006258000154048204, 0.012949811294674873, 0.03712997958064079, 0.005835778079926968, 0.023259596899151802, -0.07443535327911377, -0.0013239834224805236, 0.036580462008714676, -0.011376147158443928, -0.04407621547579765, 0.03361890837550163, -0.06211845204234123, 0.11060819029808044, 0.06275459378957748, 0.11565455794334412, -0.013603285886347294, -0.019701790064573288, -0.030949680134654045, 0.09251483529806137, 0.055506009608507156, -0.017939459532499313, 0.011960056610405445, -0.007916081696748734, -0.01022716797888279, 0.035142187029123306, -0.06424473226070404, -0.08266793936491013, 0.056034911423921585, 0.010331079363822937, -0.04944393038749695, 0.04218088835477829, -0.12075044959783554, -0.008886197581887245, 0.0019815522246062756, 0.018583135679364204, -0.0294912438839674, -0.07696216553449631, -0.013739261776208878, -0.0934322401881218, -0.020329372957348824, -0.048366479575634, 0.07135578989982605, 0.03806236386299133, -0.0696488469839096, 0.022115861997008324, -0.03633351996541023, 0.06801442056894302, -0.008959630504250526, 0.002912598429247737, -0.043159548193216324, 0.03744351118803024, -0.07252060621976852, -0.043747320771217346, -6.515885075941696e-8, 0.025562956929206848, 0.059980686753988266, -0.12666387856006622, 0.052230145782232285, 0.04904285445809364, 0.06763686239719391, -0.07867192476987839, -0.055148813873529434, 0.07297323644161224, 0.07458584010601044, -0.06416913121938705, 0.05361738055944443, -0.02343049645423889, -0.044999510049819946, 0.030915619805455208, 0.04912550747394562, 0.03580031543970108, -0.03906942531466484, -0.041536781936883926, -0.001486110151745379, -0.0823325663805008, -0.03929097205400467, -0.028443602845072746, 0.01982201635837555, -0.024321669712662697, -0.01855245605111122, 0.021693145856261253, 0.10099508613348007, 0.05502599850296974, -0.03618049994111061, -0.04037797451019287, 0.008163598366081715, -0.03026743419468403, -0.08275099098682404, 0.06639908999204636, -0.013720356859266758, 0.06423208117485046, 0.011628278531134129, 0.03988727182149887, -0.023770613595843315, 0.015134324319660664, -0.035513367503881454, -0.03544888272881508, -0.005358386319130659, 0.06118281930685043, 0.0465933233499527, -0.08987820148468018, 0.022086111828684807, 0.02810659632086754, 0.06711570173501968, 0.017123954370617867, -0.08889888226985931, -0.08151422441005707, -0.003908701241016388, -0.011904189363121986, -0.033350132405757904, -0.022842656821012497, -0.024052567780017853, -0.0313570573925972, -0.07716478407382965, 0.08381851017475128, 0.06027289479970932, -0.017237722873687744, -0.006695172283798456 ]

{ "pdf_file": "TSMIELG5W75VQXCVNCAXWP6HYGEW4KOV.pdf", "text": "ED310832 1989-08-00 Commitment toTransfer. ERIC Digest.\nERIC Development Teamwww.eric.ed.gov\nTable of Contents\nIf you're viewing this document online, you can click any of the topics below to link directly to that section.Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest. 1SHIFTING PRIORITIES 2INFLUENCES ON TRANSFER RATES 2EFFORTS TO BOLSTER THE TRANSFER FUNCTIONSTATEWIDE EFFORTSCONCLUSION 4REFERENCES 4ERIC41,0Digests\nERIC Identifier: ED310832Publication Date: 1989-08-00Author: Cohen, Arthur M.Source: ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges Los Angeles CA.Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest.\nTHIS DIGEST WAS CREATED BY ERIC, THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER. FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT ERIC, CONTACTACCESS ERIC 1-800-LET-ERICThe community colleges have had a commitment to transfer since their beginnings. Oneof their initial purposes was to take students from secondary school, provide them withgeneral education and introductory collegiate studies, and send them on to seniorinstitutions for the baccalaureate. An associate degree recipient was presumed to bequalified to enter the junior year at a university. The associate in arts and associate in\nED310832 1989-08-00 Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest. Page 1 of 6\n www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team\nscience have always been viewed as preparatory; the few associate degrees that werenot designed for transfer were given titles such as associate in applied science orassociate in general studies.SHIFTING PRIORITIESAccusations that the community colleges do not prepare their students sufficiently wellfor transfer have arisen because the proportion of students entering the colleges withthe intention of transferring and the proportion of those who did in fact transfer droppednotably during the 1970s and early 1980s. According to Medsker (1960), two-thirds ofthe students entering community colleges in the 1950s sought transfer. By the 1980s,that proportion had dropped to one-third. Around one-third of the students actuallytransferred in the 1960s. Twenty years later that proportion had dropped to under 15percent.Patterns of student attendance also reveal shifting priorities. The community collegesenroll 37 percent of all students attending higher education in America and, 48 percentof all the undergraduates. However, 65 percent of the community college studentsattend part time (Fernandez, 1987) and many already have college degrees. Somecollege district figures reflect this differentiated pattern of student attendance. Amongthe Maricopa Community College District's 60,000 students, 7,000 were formerlyenrolled in Arizona State University, whereas 8,700 Arizona State University studentswere formerly enrolled in the Maricopa colleges. Furthermore, although 45 percent ofthe high-school graduates in the Phoenix metropolitan area enter one of the localcommunity colleges, they account for only 8 percent of the district's full-time equivalentstudent enrollment (de los Santos, 1989).INFLUENCES ON TRANSFER RATESThere is no question that students enrolling in community colleges are somewhat lesslikely than four-year college students to attain baccalaureate degrees within four or fiveyears. The part-time attendance pattern certainly accounts for some of the differencebetween community college matriculants and those entering as freshmen in four-yearinstitutions. Since few community college students reside on campus or haveon-campus jobs, they tend to be less involved with their collegiate studies than theirfour-year college counterparts.The mere fact that community college matriculants must transfer from one institution toanother before obtaining the baccalaureate accounts for some of the shortfall. Manythings can happen in the process: students take jobs instead; they find that they cannotreadily leave their hometowns to go to the university; it becomes convenient to step outof education for a while and get on with other aspects of their lives.One of the widely held misconceptions about the reasons fewer students who begintheir college careers at community colleges obtain baccalaureate degrees is that the\nPage 2 of 6 ED310832 1989-08-00 Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest.\n ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov\ncolleges emphasize occupational studies and courses that do not carry transfer credit.However, more students transfer from so-called career programs than from thetraditional baccalaureate directed programs. Career education does not underminetransfer from community colleges; rather, the transfer function is weakened byinstitutional policies that support the idea of the college as a passive resource availableto all who would drop in at any time during their lifetimes to take a course in whateverinterests them at the time. These policies result in a lateral curriculum, one in whichprerequisites to courses are not enforced and in which student progress towardprogram completion is not monitored.The effects of such policies are revealed not only in the low rate of program completion,but also in the high rate of student satisfaction. Although 85 percent of communitycollege students do not obtain degrees, a similar proportion say that the collegeprovided them with what they were looking for: courses for personal interest, access tothe job market, or studies basic to their becoming functionally literate. While theorganization and funding of community college instructional programs presuppose thatstudents are taking courses in order to complete an entire program, students are quitesatisfied with education short of the degree.EFFORTS TO BOLSTER THE TRANSFERFUNCTIONMany community colleges have attempted to increase their transfer rates by monitoringstudent progress, providing information on transfer opportunities, enforcing courseprerequisites, holding special group meetings for prospective transfers, and similarinterventions. Remedial studies have become so prominent recently that they nowaccount for as much as one-third of the instructional budget, and represent the thirdmajor function of the community colleges, behind only academic and occupationalstudies. The colleges provide basic literacy studies for sizable proportions of theirstudents, including non-native English speakers, as well as those leaving high schoolwithout the ability to read or write. Some of the most innovative instruction is done in theremedial area.Testing students at entry and again at the sophomore level has become prominent andboasts to have an effect on the transfer figures. Colleges in several states are eitherrequired or urged to test students at entry and place them in programs in which theyhave a chance of success. That alone would account for much of the increase inremedial work. Florida has had such a program for several years, and more recently arequirement for basic skills assessment has been introduced into Texas. Rather thanmandating testing states such as California award additional monies to colleges thatimpose matriculation tests and seek to augment their transfer-directed activities.STATEWIDE EFFORTS\nED310832 1989-08-00 Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest. Page 3 of 6\n www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team\nThese special funds for transfer have become prominent. In 1987, eleven states weremaking special monies available to colleges to enhance transfer-directed activities.California set aside $3 million for transfer centers in 20 colleges. Colorado and Michiganmandated articulation plans between community colleges and public universities. NewJersey awarded special funds to its colleges to recruit transfer-oriented minoritystudents. Ohio awarded funds for colleges that would promote such activities (Centerfor the Study of Community Colleges, 1987). Illinois had numerous special programs toenhance minority student progress through the community colleges. These includedrecruiting and counseling high school students, providing basic skills activities for adults,and connecting the community colleges with elementary schools and intramural supportgroups (Illinois Community College Board, 1989).These types of transfer-directed activities have been summarized in many worksincluding those by Donovan and others (1987) and Richardson and Bender (1987).Most of the interventions are well intentioned and will eventually have some effect.However, some major changes must be made if the community colleges are to comeanywhere near parity in the proportion of their entering students who go on to receivethe baccalaureate. There should be statewide agreements to the effect that any studentwho completes an associate degree program is guaranteed admission to the universitywith no loss of credit. There should be special funds set aside for community collegesthat increase their percentage of transfers. Every state should have a centralizedstudent data base so that interinstitutional progress can be monitored. And there shouldbe common course numbering systems so that each student's transcript does not haveto be reviewed separately.CONCLUSIONProbably the most important single statement that can be made regarding studenttransfer is that the community college staff members must identify the potential transfersearly on and monitor their progress through the colleges, making frequent direct contactwith them until they complete their studies and enter the universities. This takes a formof dedication to student achievement that stands in contradistinction to the prevalentlaissez-faire approach to student attendance. The colleges cannot sit by and allowstudents to take a random walk through the curriculum and at the same time expeditestudent progress toward the baccalaureate.REFERENCESCenter for the Study of Community Colleges. \"An Assessment ofUrban Community Colleges Transfer Opportunities Program.\"Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of CommunityColleges, 1987. 200pp. (ED 293 573)Donovan, R. A.; And Others. \"Transfer: Making it Work.\"\nPage 4 of 6 ED310832 1989-08-00 Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest.\n ERIC Resource Center\nWashington, DC: American Association of Community andJunior Colleges, 1987.Fernandez, R. \"Enrollment in Colleges and Universities,Fall 1985. OERI Bulletin.\" Washington, DC: Center forEducation Statistics (OERI/ED), 1987. 17pp. (ED 280 353)Illinois Community College Board. \"Current Issues in TransferArticulation Between Community Colleges and Four-YearColleges and Universities in Illinois.\" Springfield:Illinois Community College Board, 1989. 19pp. (ED 304 168)Medsker, L. L. \"The Junior College: Progress and Prospect.\"New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.Richardson, R. C.; Bender, L. W. \"Fostering Minority Accesswww.eric.ed.gov\nand Achievement in Higher Education.\" San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987.The Clearinghouse operates under OERI Contract No. RI-88-06-2002.The opinions expressed in this digest do not necessarily reflect the position or policy ofOERI and no official endorsement by OERI should be inferred.\nTitle: Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest.Document Type: Viewpoints (120); Information Analyses---ERIC Information AnalysisProducts (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text(073);Target Audience: PractitionersDescriptors: Academic Standards, Articulation (Education), College Transfer Students,Community Colleges, Curriculum Problems, Higher Education, IntercollegiateCooperation, Part Time Students, Statewide Planning, Transfer Policy, TransferPrograms, Two Year CollegesIdentifiers:###\nED310832 1989-08-00 Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest. Page 5 of 6\n www.eric.ed.gov\n[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]ERIC Custom Transformations Team\nPage 6 of 6 ED310832 1989-08-00 Commitment to Transfer. ERIC Digest.\n" }

[ -0.042094193398952484, 0.07776538282632828, -0.04251868277788162, -0.05463259294629097, -0.010083426721394062, -0.06690939515829086, -0.05392659083008766, 0.10160893201828003, -0.029670104384422302, 0.039807096123695374, 0.08435872942209244, 0.10115358978509903, 0.003155529499053955, 0.0007953220629133284, -0.11512602120637894, -0.03925696760416031, 0.007732728961855173, -0.005837524775415659, -0.02392185851931572, 0.09316137433052063, 0.08820968121290207, 0.07296257466077805, 0.044058214873075485, 0.013680561445653439, -0.010958714410662651, 0.03160993754863739, -0.06116654723882675, -0.04883750528097153, -0.046053171157836914, -0.05199491232633591, 0.01981014758348465, 0.051374588161706924, 0.058148257434368134, -0.027680465951561928, 0.09985816478729248, 0.034499261528253555, 0.08174201846122742, -0.04019078612327576, -0.04397085681557655, 0.05902150645852089, -0.060416966676712036, -0.07599321752786636, -0.04382453113794327, 0.024026334285736084, 0.025835584849119186, 0.00034147684345953166, -0.08514279127120972, -0.0014414205215871334, -0.035383932292461395, 0.0787571370601654, -0.11265021562576294, -0.015466516837477684, 0.030088363215327263, -0.002012301469221711, 0.003372638486325741, -0.0321931391954422, -0.016793962568044662, 0.039162181317806244, -0.12584944069385529, -0.007720912341028452, -0.055400241166353226, 0.07390379160642624, -0.08866744488477707, 0.027245521545410156, 0.0314294658601284, 0.03880300745368004, 0.0090715941041708, -0.006557002663612366, -0.02178451605141163, 0.0016605849377810955, -0.03861078992486, -0.03503681719303131, 0.06852168589830399, 0.11997149884700775, 0.004198270849883556, 0.03421470895409584, 0.009465768933296204, -0.0013642236590385437, 0.01256207749247551, -0.09410829842090607, 0.027208350598812103, 0.018186055123806, 0.03726985305547714, 0.00894938874989748, -0.04766203090548515, 0.009363820776343346, 0.006605738308280706, 0.059246327728033066, -0.0065450239926576614, -0.016450902447104454, 0.07105317711830139, 0.039704423397779465, -0.054556697607040405, -0.001982117770239711, -0.003457233775407076, 0.060965076088905334, 0.02914453111588955, -0.002686037914827466, 0.04138052836060524, 0.047003086656332016, -0.006593225058168173, -0.0534905306994915, 0.029953893274068832, -0.03775841370224953, -0.12239344418048859, -0.12197347730398178, 0.022784404456615448, -0.05413990095257759, 0.0043883416801691055, -0.01233338937163353, 0.0180827584117651, 0.013152947649359703, -0.05135693401098251, -0.04164370149374008, -0.009290146641433239, -0.010187466628849506, -0.019608406350016594, -0.023582985624670982, 0.021732181310653687, -0.0601816400885582, 0.03138937056064606, -0.038178492337465286, -0.02357693761587143, -0.029238320887088776, 0.006771785207092762, -0.09817738831043243, 0.05495187267661095, 1.1754268333655122e-32, 0.017812561243772507, 0.026789462193846703, 0.04593594744801521, 0.07996241748332977, -0.005077724810689688, 0.02875356376171112, -0.026827214285731316, -0.044012390077114105, 0.01097913458943367, -0.05702256038784981, -0.04570898786187172, 0.056656621396541595, 0.005152970086783171, 0.04190153256058693, -0.009225691668689251, 0.01402661856263876, -0.036622148007154465, 0.07342185825109482, -0.03548971563577652, 0.07008758932352066, 0.03570790961384773, -0.08661224693059921, 0.04166952148079872, 0.024917881935834885, -0.05055214837193489, 0.09286180883646011, -0.03410681337118149, -0.03142561390995979, -0.017161283642053604, 0.008220953866839409, 0.01665087416768074, -0.048367373645305634, 0.01610991545021534, -0.09294606745243073, -0.056199830025434494, 0.019565867260098457, 0.0022500879131257534, -0.009312712587416172, -0.055532801896333694, -0.0355612114071846, 0.0847148522734642, 0.06946748495101929, 0.13319316506385803, 0.05008261278271675, 0.033137910068035126, 0.0041641732677817345, 0.02288660779595375, -0.00837770290672779, 0.03783280402421951, 0.05328966677188873, -0.03123876452445984, -0.026066116988658905, -0.03321301192045212, -0.09323343634605408, -0.027918299660086632, 0.016004059463739395, -0.042275939136743546, -0.008199608884751797, -0.023387715220451355, -0.02912726067006588, 0.1151127964258194, 0.08796700835227966, -0.008150940760970116, -0.023538794368505478, -0.017478786408901215, -0.05782116949558258, -0.07577987760305405, -0.03701522946357727, 0.11329969018697739, -0.07647097855806351, -0.08644262701272964, -0.019624438136816025, -0.02220977284014225, -0.0056190951727330685, 0.009565064683556557, 0.009348057210445404, 0.05974693223834038, 0.02283382974565029, 0.028657184913754463, -0.047825224697589874, 0.01076806616038084, 0.001735929399728775, -0.0754104033112526, -0.05280674621462822, -0.01946941763162613, 0.03704135864973068, 0.00402094004675746, 0.03884660825133324, 0.006845810916274786, 0.042941559106111526, 0.0010173228802159429, -0.030873700976371765, -0.025111280381679535, 0.008167633786797523, 0.05181722342967987, -1.2233413055361733e-32, -0.003986617084592581, -0.030165638774633408, -0.050480108708143234, 0.05836901813745499, 0.041013263165950775, 0.011063040234148502, -0.0014132229844108224, 0.051682520657777786, 0.0706152468919754, -0.12432043999433517, 0.01784316450357437, -0.07273237407207489, -0.018341243267059326, -0.06862041354179382, -0.04592270404100418, 0.029658636078238487, -0.08704817295074463, -0.0029548790771514177, -0.054592713713645935, -0.03593224659562111, -0.041104163974523544, 0.06687772274017334, 0.021465439349412918, 0.09735959023237228, 0.05984025076031685, 0.033955078572034836, -0.002056451980024576, -0.030567295849323273, -0.01652532070875168, 0.018254516646265984, 0.01582222431898117, -0.050496019423007965, -0.0681062564253807, 0.11125946044921875, -0.022327043116092682, -0.05271405726671219, 0.03692759945988655, 0.03569638356566429, -0.002977669471874833, 0.023829452693462372, 0.06427709758281708, 0.0615939162671566, -0.05208420380949974, -0.05262269824743271, -0.050948161631822586, 0.022584402933716774, -0.021668408066034317, -0.03817378357052803, 0.060007162392139435, 0.01473586168140173, 0.07272721827030182, -0.05755283683538437, -0.022091994062066078, -0.06972366571426392, 0.0407043993473053, 0.014193598181009293, -0.07856546342372894, -0.05738052353262901, -0.17920680344104767, 0.029062308371067047, 0.020208965986967087, 0.060607146471738815, -0.14303496479988098, -0.016300780698657036, 0.039017949253320694, -0.04325404763221741, -0.008100952953100204, 0.010716032236814499, -0.014741427265107632, 0.00328588904812932, 0.034815821796655655, -0.0569012276828289, -0.0003423837188165635, -0.11257889866828918, 0.024093545973300934, -0.071048803627491, -0.045180581510066986, -0.013432350941002369, -0.08081512153148651, 0.047579575330019, 0.048392005264759064, -0.020991722121834755, -0.06567715853452682, 0.09426756203174591, 0.04071064293384552, 0.013620346784591675, -0.013989218510687351, -0.03712666779756546, 0.009983491152524948, 0.0777381956577301, -0.007503264583647251, 0.07921256870031357, -0.0225886981934309, 0.0920972228050232, 0.03843439370393753, -7.300329230019997e-8, 0.033452022820711136, -0.08829417824745178, 0.005349759478121996, 0.0004365087952464819, 0.0030294866301119328, -0.030699240043759346, 0.039605412632226944, -0.026467837393283844, -0.0064944918267428875, 0.000653855677228421, 0.01592598296701908, -0.03575979545712471, -0.052136294543743134, -0.1101875752210617, 0.045414380729198456, 0.03485839441418648, 0.042143430560827255, 0.07969479262828827, -0.11013947427272797, -0.026264462620019913, 0.0062979841604828835, -0.08362381905317307, 0.004080143291503191, 0.01967582479119301, -0.04172706976532936, 0.06149512156844139, 0.0031238116789609194, -0.0024571861140429974, -0.01365033071488142, -0.013897953554987907, 0.02327088639140129, -0.007494088262319565, 0.06581585109233856, -0.007294917479157448, -0.004042632412165403, -0.08415194600820541, 0.04384700953960419, 0.07380378246307373, 0.0271891038864851, 0.07447922974824905, 0.0035277074202895164, -0.00909511186182499, -0.00949097704142332, 0.04335799068212509, 0.03244391083717346, -0.1259695589542389, -0.027390118688344955, 0.03226642683148384, 0.011093593202531338, -0.008878225460648537, -0.005960027687251568, -0.02332361973822117, 0.019017037004232407, -0.01065942645072937, -0.07341723889112473, -0.002066671149805188, 0.055096711963415146, 0.08667086809873581, 0.02413150854408741, 0.003540374105796218, 0.09040703624486923, 0.013990352861583233, 0.10751744359731674, 0.016618819907307625 ]

{ "pdf_file": "XYKJN65G53ZKHHSTN4BM6WZEXSYDKAVJ.pdf", "text": " Elimine los gé rmenes...\nLAVESE LAS MANOS\n1.\nREMOJE\nENJUAGE\nSEQUEENJABONE\nLAVE2. 3.\n4.\n5.6.CIERRE LA LLAVE \nDE AGUA CON UNA TOALLA DE PAPEL\nDOH Pub 130-012 8/2006 SpanishPara personas discapacitadas, este documento está disponible a su pedido en otros formatos.\nPara hacer su pedido, llame a 1-800-525-0127 (TDD/TTY 1-800-833-6388).C\nM\nY\nCM\nMY\nCY\nCMY\nK Dear Colleague ,\nThe Washington State Department of Health (DOH) provides print-ready files \n(PDFs) of health education materials. To ensure that the original quality of the piece \nis maintained, please read and follow the instructions below and the specifications included for professional printing.\n• Use the latest version. DOH materials are developed using the most current \ninformation available, are checked for clinical accuracy, and are field tested with the intended audience to ensure they are clear and readable. DOH \nprograms make periodic revisions to educational materials, so please check \nthis web site to be sure you have the latest version. DOH assumes no responsibility for the use of this material or for any errors or omissions.\n• Do not alter. We are providing this artwork with the understanding that \nit will be printed without alterations and copies will be free to the public. Do not edit the text or use illustrations or photographs for other purposes \nwithout first contacting us. Please do not alter or remove the DOH logo, \npublication number or revision date. If you want to use a part of this publication for other purposes, contact the Office of Health Promotion first.\n• For quality reproduction: Low resolution PDF files are intended for black \nand white or color desktop printers. They work best if you are making only one or two copies. High resolution PDF files are intended for reproducing \nlarge quantities and are set up for use by professional offset print shops. \nThe high resolution files also include detailed printing specifications. Please match them as closely as possible and insist on the best possible quality for \nall reproductions.\nIf you have questions, contact:\nOffice of Health Promotion\nP .O. Box 47833 Olympia, WA 98504-7833 \n(360) 236-3736\nSincerely,\nHealth Education Resource Exchange Web Team PRINTING SPECIFICATIONS\nTitle: Be a Germ Buster. . .Wash Your Hands!\nSize: 11 x 8.5\nPaper stock: 80# gloss coated cover white\nInk color: English side PMS 286\nSpanish side PMS 267\nSpecial instructions: 2-sided printing. English side one, Spanish side two.\nDOH Pub #: 130-012" }

[ -0.03711914271116257, 0.06302737444639206, 0.01857328787446022, -0.003550573717802763, -0.023649487644433975, 0.03692249581217766, -0.009694583714008331, 0.08591873198747635, -0.08203652501106262, -0.006722661666572094, -0.0171952024102211, -0.08428086340427399, -0.02747107483446598, 0.004454843699932098, -0.08212012052536011, -0.029904987663030624, 0.019420191645622253, 0.010303626768290997, -0.07954474538564682, -0.009818433783948421, -0.011913561262190342, -0.05134427919983864, 0.025808310136198997, 0.01290062814950943, 0.018982676789164543, 0.012937921099364758, -0.14014753699302673, 0.0151131646707654, -0.05833298712968826, -0.022109705954790115, -0.054631467908620834, 0.03492242097854614, -0.026609692722558975, -0.03841978311538696, -0.06130100414156914, -0.018482426181435585, 0.021884959191083908, 0.0030568770598620176, 0.01860819198191166, 0.04010576754808426, 0.03087521158158779, -0.032483380287885666, -0.06363476812839508, 0.012571963481605053, 0.00868882518261671, 0.05733317881822586, -0.0006231092847883701, 0.02027929574251175, 0.019227927550673485, 0.07202410697937012, -0.061581581830978394, -0.028171302750706673, 0.01780753582715988, -0.028474971652030945, 0.000010134606782230549, 0.041922274976968765, -0.03688936308026314, -0.03335803747177124, 0.03635463863611221, -0.01309514045715332, 0.03124835155904293, 0.0178896002471447, -0.017365530133247375, 0.05972500145435333, -0.07543338090181351, -0.04916156083345413, -0.08849403262138367, -0.005616643000394106, -0.029703648760914803, 0.03642265498638153, 0.10575200617313385, 0.0004764902114402503, 0.029383892193436623, -0.04686587676405907, 0.0342005230486393, 0.061756957322359085, -0.010320461355149746, -0.03681857883930206, 0.04857870563864708, -0.0852743536233902, -0.005692705512046814, -0.047645773738622665, 0.05394034460186958, -0.018643725663423538, 0.05547890439629555, -0.0511266328394413, 0.019984178245067596, 0.0002146459009964019, 0.014555515721440315, -0.05737382918596268, -0.011850605718791485, -0.037994109094142914, -0.0662275105714798, 0.059972841292619705, 0.10676936060190201, 0.00848731305450201, 0.0349733941257, 0.034714363515377045, -0.05541636794805527, 0.05555540323257446, 0.051495201885700226, -0.03173418715596199, 0.006464437115937471, 0.057280268520116806, 0.004872257821261883, 0.026554513722658157, -0.047730058431625366, 0.0015661932993680239, -0.02923646941781044, -0.014161516912281513, -0.046794380992650986, -0.07373646646738052, 0.07236934453248978, 0.007053228560835123, -0.03338438645005226, 0.049307722598314285, -0.10343606024980545, 0.07338931411504745, -0.04030463099479675, -0.016782885417342186, 0.03850864619016647, 0.06434600055217743, 0.01569630205631256, 0.023899585008621216, -0.0031030757818371058, -0.0059511992149055, 0.05269933491945267, 1.1551967225246544e-32, 0.01067980844527483, -0.0002159191353712231, -0.050691455602645874, 0.008365480229258537, 0.037779636681079865, -0.03698824718594551, -0.06224007532000542, 0.03484367951750755, -0.05286524444818497, 0.016409846022725105, -0.07612265646457672, -0.042543020099401474, -0.04131733998656273, -0.06265155971050262, 0.03958640620112419, -0.027744704857468605, 0.04584292694926262, -0.030620647594332695, -0.0035242100711911917, -0.03697475418448448, 0.02989860065281391, 0.012578497640788555, -0.011294228956103325, -0.07915821671485901, -0.04353978857398033, 0.06741699576377869, -0.00012096814316464588, -0.0816628485918045, -0.060448162257671356, 0.08363794535398483, 0.008582846261560917, -0.07252293825149536, -0.11350159347057343, 0.00022759816783946007, -0.060560744255781174, -0.0561758317053318, -0.014824505895376205, -0.1285688281059265, -0.09300557523965836, -0.009320191107690334, -0.030467601493000984, -0.0226273313164711, -0.11524257808923721, 0.011060049757361412, -0.02893664315342903, 0.02550400234758854, 0.0010512972949072719, 0.1281282752752304, 0.09157311171293259, 0.07636429369449615, -0.08281460404396057, 0.009288230910897255, -0.005140526220202446, -0.006685220170766115, 0.00783548690378666, 0.0210252795368433, -0.010162072256207466, 0.04691462218761444, -0.05059234797954559, -0.05772446095943451, 0.04375211149454117, 0.026534270495176315, 0.023141708225011826, -0.09454752504825592, -0.06821335107088089, 0.027479711920022964, -0.017864195629954338, 0.0007557184435427189, -0.03787686675786972, -0.02120014652609825, -0.021944429725408554, -0.015416692942380905, 0.007913198322057724, -0.02582239918410778, 0.13266722857952118, -0.010821936652064323, 0.10967912524938583, -0.01153729110956192, 0.011900494806468487, -0.07227234542369843, -0.005377241410315037, 0.06972111761569977, -0.03949259594082832, -0.034103989601135254, 0.009199382737278938, -0.04867777228355408, 0.03730009123682976, -0.017060797661542892, -0.017713971436023712, 0.009820790030062199, 0.04673505201935768, -0.023477599024772644, -0.00874334666877985, -0.0222220029681921, -0.051669150590896606, -1.1038229908847141e-32, -0.0051928372122347355, -0.031255438923835754, -0.024007154628634453, 0.027444973587989807, 0.04802075773477554, 0.02678273245692253, -0.018431151285767555, 0.08012779802083969, 0.05656508728861809, 0.01778145134449005, -0.06686002016067505, 0.039450883865356445, 0.0752374529838562, -0.05156242102384567, 0.01277117058634758, -0.07217853516340256, 0.08854521065950394, 0.10870636254549026, 0.0404331237077713, -0.029832998290657997, 0.09464352577924728, -0.0027881453279405832, -0.14034351706504822, -0.025848424062132835, 0.021214766427874565, 0.11159618198871613, 0.07554306089878082, -0.030884135514497757, -0.09892430156469345, 0.023193005472421646, -0.04612624645233154, -0.012128173373639584, -0.04229714721441269, -0.043915823101997375, -0.03721138834953308, 0.10488246381282806, 0.035896506160497665, 0.008749681524932384, -0.14014412462711334, 0.017705827951431274, 0.03223268315196037, 0.0215190127491951, 0.01717795990407467, 0.057943325489759445, 0.028100213035941124, -0.03531714901328087, -0.07119296491146088, 0.07088350504636765, 0.05668424442410469, 0.09263119846582413, 0.055855877697467804, 0.07524031400680542, -0.015671558678150177, 0.020701896399259567, 0.022909091785550117, 0.021747512742877007, 0.003911973442882299, -0.03155015408992767, -0.025534318760037422, 0.03735397383570671, -0.04392848163843155, 0.03625292330980301, -0.037390269339084625, 0.12484590709209442, 0.05003553256392479, 0.008230936713516712, -0.029488826170563698, -0.005100793670862913, -0.00604172982275486, 0.0077248187735676765, -0.0006073795375414193, 0.02697746269404888, -0.05315864458680153, -0.09732561558485031, 0.0269307903945446, 0.08672148734331131, 0.03184618800878525, 0.07860425114631653, 0.07047319412231445, 0.054163236171007156, -0.03604535013437271, 0.04850146546959877, 0.10291672497987747, 0.05212979018688202, 0.03518135845661163, -0.06478136777877808, -0.006232526618987322, 0.05294186621904373, 0.002350270515307784, 0.016356319189071655, 0.09972750395536423, 0.05860164016485214, 0.02468242682516575, 0.032591983675956726, 0.09059039503335953, -8.45695709017491e-8, 0.046405576169490814, 0.12069535255432129, -0.03007330372929573, -0.0024239392951130867, 0.050526075065135956, -0.04321104288101196, -0.012214813381433487, 0.007929667830467224, -0.086232490837574, -0.014621568843722343, 0.09043078124523163, 0.06321608275175095, -0.02375258132815361, 0.014021042734384537, 0.07467562705278397, -0.07511503994464874, -0.06696664541959763, -0.024564223363995552, -0.055427175015211105, 0.0008693120907992125, 0.05079452693462372, 0.00809831079095602, 0.012769930996000767, -0.1241687536239624, -0.04664795100688934, -0.023081721737980843, -0.0029936456121504307, -0.007209800183773041, -0.022932497784495354, -0.03258043900132179, -0.013666515238583088, 0.05114516243338585, -0.025348031893372536, -0.09993311017751694, -0.04840341955423355, 0.025864912196993828, -0.13166086375713348, 0.043205421417951584, -0.03328645974397659, -0.02773507498204708, -0.018545685335993767, 0.03555334359407425, 0.062259700149297714, 0.040750693529844284, 0.09551562368869781, 0.03975755721330643, 0.027771878987550735, -0.048941969871520996, 0.0007363155018538237, -0.07728269696235657, -0.10076527297496796, -0.02995551936328411, 0.029460914433002472, 0.013621093705296516, -0.005911177024245262, 0.03535756096243858, -0.02606946788728237, -0.055745694786310196, -0.018144400790333748, 0.0411892868578434, -0.027903476729989052, -0.06133367866277695, -0.0012999989558011293, 0.02670237421989441 ]

{ "pdf_file": "JX4QV4DIXVXTDI737KSBDD7U3WHIGNWL.pdf", "text": "THEFAINTPAULDAILY GLOBE:THURSDAY MORNING. AUGUST 11,1892. 5\nSOMEQUEERRAGES.\nHorsesatHaraline DoNot\nRunExactly asEx-\npected.\nAsFavorites, Knight,Sulross\nandRomair Goto\nPieces.\nYoTambien, GoldaandBuck-\nnerRealizetheTalent's\nHope.\nPiccolo andDavePulsifer\nProvetheOutside Good\nThing-s.\n,—Betting. •\nHorses. Weight.Straight. Place.Fir;-trace,forthroeyenr-oidsandupwards,\nSixfurloiißS. Time.1:lf-v4—\n1.Piccolo 122stol2to1...1001\")to14to1\n8.SirWalterRaleigh.l22.'0to1sto1\nSecond race,fortwo-year-olds, fivefur-lon'.;>.Time,1:00—\n1.(iolda 10S11to10out\n2.Linda ICBoto16to5b.Prize 115oto5outThirdrace,sellins,forthree-year-olds andupwards, mile.Time,1:40—\n1.CostaRica 101sto1even2.LenaFrey 'M3to1out\n3.Tenor 10520to16to1Fourth race.TwinCityOaks,forthree-\nyear-olds, mileand«neighth. Time.!:59Va—1.YoTambien 122Ito10out\nFifthrace,forthree-year-olds andup-ward;-,mile.Time.1:47—\n1.BolivarBurkner...Ul 9to10out\n2.CarrollKeid 12214to12toI3.Cevertou 11l11to10outSixthrace,forihree-year-olds andup-wards,sixfurlongs. Tinie,1:18—\n1.DaveI'ulsifer 1053to1even\n2.l.retHarte 105sto24to5V.Romaiii 10\")6t05 1102\nONNIE YoTambien, the\nprincessottheturf,hassetheradmirers\nwildoncemorebyherindom-\nitablecourage\nandsuperla-\ntivepowers.\nSheranaway\nfromherrivals\natHamline\nyesterday, and\ncarriedoffthoTwinCityOakspurse,at\namileandaneigtli.withtheutmost\nease.Thetrackwasstillheavy, al-thouginasurprisingly bettercondition\nthanhadbeenanticipated byvotariesoftheracingcourse. Thisaccounts,\ninameasure, forthefactthatthedistance wasnotmadeinbet-\ntertime.Itrequired L:s9}£,butYo\nTambien ranunderastrong pull\nthroughout True,tlieonlyother can-\ndidateswereNatalieam!*Lillian Bea-trice,butitshouldbeborneinmind\nthatthebeautiful daughter ofJoe\nHooker-Marion wasgivingweightsina\nliberaldegree. Tobespecific, shecar-\nried122pounds, whileLillianonlyhad\n111upandNatalie 113.The\"book-ies''knowasurethins whenitconfronts them, andthey\nwereexceedingly charyofplacing\nodds.Theystartedat1to5andquickly\nrundowntoItoU).Butmostofthebetting wasmadewithYoTambien out,\nandLhenNatalie wasplayed someat2\nto5andLillianBeatriceat8to5.Some\nbookmakers placedthesetwoin\"the\nfieldandmadetheodds10toIagainstthem.ButYoTambien couldbeat\nthemoucwithtopweightsandalland\nromptheentiredistance. Suchwastheresult,withNatalieinsecondplace.\nAsawhole,itwasnotfavorite's day.\nTheywerelaidlowinthreeinstances.Tin;slatewasbrokenintheverytirst\nevent.LJKnight cametothetrack\nwithaproudrecordandapedigree thatmustinspireconfidence, butheproved\nadismal failure,andthetalentwas\ndriven almostdistract byhisquit-tinglikeadog,whilePiccolo,well\nbredandanavailable candidate, itis\ntrue,wonhandsdown,andKnightdidnotevenruntoamark,hiesimplyquit.\n(jolda,aprimefavorite, beatoutLinda,PrizeandDaveCwithridiculousease,buttheoddsweresuchthatthe\nmoneywasnotveryextensive inamount\nthatshecarried, fiullross, sowell\nthought of,andKiklare, whomadea\nsensational raceearlierinthemeeting\nagainstCostaKica,PatCouleyanda\ngoodfield,disappointed ahostofad-\nmirers. Kiidare haddefeated CostaRicasoeasilythatonewouldbedubbed\nfoolishtoplayCostaKicaagainsthim,\nandstillCosiaKicawonyesterday just\naseasily,andneitherISullrossnorKii-\ndareshowedup.Togoback,Sullross\nhadalsodefeated CostaKica,Carmen\nandacoedfield.Butfatestoodinallitsghastlyarray,defianttothejudg-\nmentofthetalentyesterday, as\nwasagain exemplified intheracewherein Ceverton, thepride\noftheKendall stable,andthemateofYoTambien, wasdefeatedinamileracebyBolivarBuckner in1:47.No\nonecouldhavedreamed thatthegreat\nCeverton couldhavegivensuchanex-\nhibitionofabjecthelplessness, butsoitwas.HadevenBrownIdle,a100to1\nchancebeendrivenout,thechancesare\nthatThorpe's mountwouldnothave\nShown. Bolivar Buckner wonwith\nCarrollReidintheplacebyfullysix\nlengths. Thiswasnotbecause the\ntrackwasexceptionally bad,butbe-causethehorsecitherhadnoheart,or\nThorpe wonttosleepenroute.Thisproblem mustbelefttothepublicto\nsolve.RomainhadrunwellforhisclassatBamline. Hechafed'lorrentandForesttothewireintheirsensational race,and\nhehadshownexcellent burstsofspeed.\nNaturally hewasthechoiceofthetalent,butthirdplacewasasgoodashewasabletout-tyesterday against such\noutside performers asDavePulsifier\nandBretIlarte.Itwasadayofsur-\nprises,r.ndthetalentwillnow*beginto\ntakechances onlongshotsandpayless\nattention t<.breeding andpastperform-\nancesinthismeeting.\nTheitleeting Continued aWeek.\nTheseason hasbeenasuccessallinall—apronounced success—elsethemanagement wouldnothaveconcluded\ntoprolong themeeting anotherweek.\nYesterday theannouncement wasbul-\nletinedthattheraceswillbecontinuedthroughout nextweek.Itisknown\nthatseveral stablesofexcellent racerswillbeshipped atoncefromChicago\nandotherplaces tostartfortherichpurses thattheclubwill\noffernextweek.Themeredec-\nlarationivChicago yesterday brought\nnumerous telegrams forstablespace,\nandthepatronsofthetrackwillhailtheannouncement withdelightwhen\ntheylearnthatasccreormoreofthepnrseandstakewinnersofothertracks\n—horses thathaveneverranhere,will\nbestartednextweek.\nAnotableincidentofthedaywasthebidding onCostaKicaintheselling\nrace.\"Shehadbeenentered at$500\nonly,butshewasrunupto$'.WO.or?400overherentrance sum,andshewasboughtbyherowner.t,Talent's FirstBreak.J.L.Knight waslooseduponasacinchinthefirstevsntyesterday, and\nwasplayedheavilyat2*to1,although\ntheoddsattheoutsetwereposted7to\n5.Falero's excellent runthedaybe-\nforemadehimwellthoughtofandhe\nremained steadily at2to1throughout\nthebetting. Few,comparatively,caughtthereallygoodthing,Piccaioat\noddsofsto1.Agreatdealofdelay\nandconsequent annoyance occurred\natthepost.Piccaio andSirWalter\nRaleigh actedinturnasthoughthey\nwereseverely gluedtothetrack,and\nbreakaway afterbreakaway occurred\nwithKnightalways tothefrontand\ntore.Thorpe wasentirelytooeagerto\ngetoff,andhiszealmusthaveworried\nandtiredhismount.Afterahalfhour,inwhichthepa-\ntienceoftheaudience became sorelytried,theflagdroppedandSirWaiter\nbeganproceedings byBettingthepace.\nKnightwasonhissaddlegirthand\nPiccolotwolengthsaway.Atthequar-\nterJLKnight hadtnecoignofvan-\ntair<\\whichheheldthelengthofthe\nbackstretch whenhewasdisplaced by\nPiccolo,andSirWaltercamethirdinto\nthestretch. AliceDnowbegantomoveupveryfastundertheguidance\nofKunze,andshehadaninteresting\nracewithSirWalter Raleighfortheplace.Thefinishwassoclose,indeed,\nthatthedecision ofthejudges was\nquestioned bytheaudience. Theplace\nwasgiventoAliceDalengthbehindPiccolo, andSirWalter wasmarkedup\nforthird.Cleverobservers ofracesweresurellaliegUi wassecondandthat\ncertain bets—However, AliceDgotthe\nplace.\nBUMMART.*\nSixfurlongs, forthreeyear-olds andup-\nwards:purse§500.\nPiccolo. 122,bh5,Petrarch-Lady Grace(Winder). P.D.Rowe: 1\nAliceD,1U.\"».bf3,Iroouois-Berganiont\n(Kunze), Lakeland Stable 2\nSirWalterRaleigh. 122,bh5.KinsBan-\nCiueenBess(Griffin), \\V.G.Postlewait.. 3\nAlOrtb,115(Flaherty), Coronet (Hem),L.J.Knight (Thorpe) andFalcro, 105(Free\nman),wereunplaced.Time,1:16%.\nBETTIXtt.First. Horses. Post.\n6to1and2to1....Picc010.... 5to1and2tol\n25to1andCtoI...Alice1)...15toland4to1\n15to1and4tol.SirWal.R'lh.2o to1and5to1\n30to1and10to1..Al0rth...25t0 1andBto1\n10to1and3to1...C0r0net...12to1and3to17to5and3to5..LKnight..2to1and7to8\n2to1and4to5....Falero 2to1and4to5\nPrizeWaited TooLong.\nGoldahadaneasythinginthenextevent,andthosewhohadbackedJLKnight asacertainty weretoomuch\ndazedtoplaythelullsisterofGold-\nstone,whohadgivensuchexcellent ex-\nhibitions ofspeedearlierinthemeet-\ning.Golda,however, wasthelavorite.\nShestartedat4to5andclosedat11to\n10atthepost,butPrizehadthecallat\ntimes,fortherewasadeep-seated im-pression thathewasdue,asl'iceolo\nhadbeeninthefirstrace.Prizestarted\natevenmoneyandclosedat6to5.\nLindaandDaveCwerepractically ig-\nnored,savebythosewhoplaylong\nshots\"justforluck.\"Linda's odds\nwere8to1and6to1,andDaveCwent\nfrom8to1upto40to1,withfewtoplayhim.\nGoldastartedlikearacer,andwas\nneverheadedfromposttofinish.Dave\nCwnssecondtogetawaywithLinda\ninthethirdplace.AtthehalfLinda\nhadmoveduptosecondplaceaudheld\nitintothestretch. Allwhipped tora\nfewhundred yards,whentheresult\nwasapparently accepted bythe\"jocks\"\nasacertainty, andthecandidates were\nallowed tocomeinatwill.Prizewasan\nexception, however. Fromtwelvelengthsintherearsheranlikethe\nwindandouttooted DaveCmanab-\nsurdway.Shewascoining fast,andinahalffurlongfurtherwouldhavewon,butthebestshegotwasthird\nplace.\nSUMMARY.\nFivefarlonga, fortwo-year-olds, purse,\n$500.divided—Golda, 108,bf,TenStone-Gold Bug\n(Thorpej,J.I).Patton 1\nLinda. liiH,ehf,LiudenAdele(Smith),\nCharterOakstable 2\nPrize.115.bf,Cheviot-Sister toLottery\n(Henuesey). D.J.McCarthy 3\nUaveC,111,(Watkiusj, alsoran.Time,\n1:U5.\nBETTING.First. Horses. Post.\n4tor>andout Golda 11to10andout\n8to1and'ito1Linda 6toIandlito5\nEvenaudout Prize(ito5andout\n5to1und2to1DaveC..40to1and5to1\nKelablc OldOosteKica.\nSullross wasahotfavorite forthenextevent.Bisperformances certainly jentitledhimtothispostofhonor.He\nwasplayedheavilyat3to2.Theopen-ingbetting wasofthemostcautioussort,fortheoddsweresuchthatthe\nbookies mustmakeabigwinningif\ntherewasmuchbetting, because ofthe\nfactthatthemoneywassuretobewellspreadoutoverthebooks.Atthepost.Ihowever, theoddsbecame moreliberaljallalongtheline,andthebettingbe-Icamelastandfurious. Kildarefound!manyadmirers at7to1,andprettyjLenatreywastherageforafewmo-i\nmentsatSto1,whileLondon Smoke,\nwhohadtwicepreviously beenahottip,wasbackedingoodlysumsatoddsotBto1.andCostaUicaat5to1was\nwellconsidered. Therewaslittlebet-\ntinirontheothers.\nCostaKicatooktheflagfirst,and\nshowed thewaytothefarturn,while\nTenorstartedsecondandKiklarethird.AtthequarterLondonSmokeexhibitedaburstofspeed,andshowed colorsinsecond place,anditwasherethatWoodberrymoveduptothirdplace.\nSotheyrantothethree-quarters, when\nLenaFreycameupfastandchallenged\ntheleaders,andfinallysucceeded in\ngettingthebestofthestruggle. Sheledintothestretch,butwasbeatenoutbyCostaKicabyalength.Tenorrun-ninginthird.\nfIMSABT.\nOnemile,selliug,forthreeyear-olds; purse\n|500,divided—\nCosialiiea.101,brh.5,Griustead-AHhola(liowry), FosterMattieLong 1LenaFrey.94.ehf.3,Midlothian-Loraine\n(Clayton), C.P.Fiuk 2Tenor, 103,bitc,4,Falsetto-Cleopatra\n(Freemau), \\V.K.Letcher 3Kildare, 107(Ilenesey); London Smoke,\n105(Thorpe): Sulross(Williams); Wood-berry.04illein):andFloraMcDonald (Mag-\nnusen).wereunplaced.Time,1:40.\nBETTING.First. Horses. Post.\n'£to1and4tos..CostaKica...sto1andeven4to1and3to2..LenaFrey \\\\to1andout5to1and2toI...Tenor 20to1anaGto15to2andevenKildare 7to1and2to14to1and.\">to3.Lon.Smoke.8toIand3to13toIandeven Sulross 3to2audout\n6to1and2toL.Woodberry.lo to1and4to115to1andtitol.MeDonald'.lOO to1and20to1\nTheFillyWalked In.\nThencametheraceoftheday.Queenly YoTambien wastoattempt togiveweightstoherrivals.MinnieCccwasscratched, andfewdoubted herabilitytodothetaskcutoutforher.Hercompetitors wereLillianBeatriceandNatalie, andthebettingstarted at1to5agaiustYoTambien; buttherushquickly changed theoddsto1to10,andthentheplaying became eeneratly fortheplace.Thatistosay,YoTambien\nwasout,andthenNatalie wassoldat1to-2,andagainat2to0,audLillianat8to5.\nNataliesetthepacefromthepost.and\nYoTambien andLillian passedthestandneckandneck.Atthequartertherewasnochange,and atthemileYoTambien, stillunderThorpe's strongpull,rantothefrontandrompedhomelikeacoltatplay.Natalie secondbytwolengthsoverLilliauBeatrice.\nSI'MJIART.\\u25a0**\"\\u25a0\nTwinCityOaks,mileaudaneighth,forthree-year-olds, pursegl.<a>\">—YoTambien, 11:.',ehf,JoeHooker-Marion(Thorpe). Kendall stable iNatalie, 113.ehf,Hindoo-Meddle, (Grif-\ntsedinMillionsofHomes—\naqYearstheStandardfin).TalbotBrothers... 2\nLillianBeatrice, 111,bf,Gleugajy-Dublin\nBelle(Freeman), W.R.Letcuer.' 3Time,I:SJV4.\nBKTITNO.First. Horses. Post.None YoTambien None15tolaud3to5...Natalie.. .lsto1and:ito520to1,3toi,.LillianBeatrice...30to1,3to2\nCeverton NotInIt.\nBolivarBuckner hadthecallwiththetalentforthenextrace.ThetipwentoutthatCeverton hadnoheart,thathewouldquitifpressed byanotherhorse,\nandthisinspired thebettingtoturn\ntowards JthegallantsonatBlazes-Alice.Still,Ceverton waswellthoughtof,andnotafewlosttheirmoneyonhim.Car-rollReidwasventured someforplace,buttheheavymoney wentinonthetwomoreprominent candidates. Boli-varsoldat7to10attheoutset,andat\ntheposttheoddshadgoneupto0to10,\nandCeverton, whohadbeenslatedatevenmoney,startedatevenmoneyand\nchanged to11to10atthepost.Carroll\nReidsoldat2to1forplace,andBrownIdle'soddswere100to1straight and(3\nto1fortheplace.\nCeverton tooktheflaginfinestyle\nandledBolivarandBrownIdletothehalf,whenBolivar cameuponeven\ntermswithCeverton. Sotheybeeanthefarturn,andunderthewhipBol-\nivardrewaway.Thorpedidn'tseem\ntomakeanefforttoprevent thecatas-trophe,andwhenthestretch wasen-\nteredBolivarhadthreelengths tothegood,Ceverton leadingCarrollReidby\ntwoiengths. Bueknerthengalloped m\nandThorpeliterally wenttosleepand\nCarroll Reidtooktheplacebysixlengths.\nBunisr.Onemile,forthree-year-olds andupwards;\nDurseS-»C0,divided—BolivarBuckner. 111.brc,3,Blazes-Alice\n(Freeman), J.W.Levy 1\nCarrollReid,122,ehc.4,ConCregan-Al-\nlena(Heunessy). Edinburg stable 2\nCeverton. 111,bc,1Deceiver-Lady Peyion\\i\nBrownIdle,101(Piantoui), alsorau.Time,1:17..\nKETTIXG.\nFirst. Horses. Post.7to10andout.BolivarBucker.9to 10andout0to1amieven.CarrollKeid.lo to1and2to1evenandoutCeverton llto111andout10tolaud 4toI.BrownIdle.100to1and0tot*Another Favorite 4;oneWroui;.\nThenextseemedtobeesteemed any-\nbody'srace,although astheanimals\nwenttothepost,DavePulsifer tips\nbecame asnumerous asblackbirds in\ntheseasonofripening .'corn.Koinair\nwasconsidered thegreatest performer,.andwasplayedfavorite, although BretIlartewasnotforgotten, norwaslowa\nBoy,alongshot,overlooked. Hewas\nbackeddownfrom10to1toBto1.\nDavePulsifer wasbackeddownfrom4tolto3to1atthepost,andBretHartewasbackeddownfrom3to1to5ito2.Theotherscouldbehadfortheasking;sotospeak.lowaBoymadeitarunaway racefromthedropoftheflag.Bretliarteran\nsecondaway,andKoinairthird.Then\nPiantoni pushed thelatterwellfor-wardandnearlyoverhauled lowaBoy,\nbutwasforcedtoretirebeforeBretliarteenteredthestretch. DavePulsi- 'fermeanwhile hadbeenloafinginthe\nfield.lowaBoyledthepartydownthestretch, followed byBretliarteandtiomair, butatthepaddock hehad\nfallenbackfromthelattertwo,andi\nwhenwithinfiftyyardsofthewire\nDavePulsifer madeaphenomenal run,\nandbeatoutBretHartebyasaddlegirth,andKomairtrailedalength be-hind.\nSUMMARY.\nSixfurlonsrs, forihrei'-year-olds andup-\nward,purseS.VJO.divided—\nDavePulsifer, 103,be,3,FreeKnight-Alice\nA(Thorpe). W.P.Mograne 1Bretliarte,lift,brc.3,llospodar-Leliu IS(Sargent). D.W.Kelly. .-...2Romair. 105,oc.Arsyle-ImD. Rosetta (Pi-antoni), 1).J..McCarthy.. 3Vupont. 112(Gifford),itobiuIc,112(Cor-Win).lowaBoy,11:.'(LeLous;),LittleJohn.:\n105(Chambers), wereunplaced.\nBUTTING.\nFirst. Horses. Post.\n4to1and4tos.DavePnlsifer.3 to1anaeven3to1ami4tor>...BretHart...sto2and4to5:\n11toandIto2Komair...6to5andJto2\n30to1and10tol..Dupont..3'-> to1and10to1i\n30to1and10tol.KobinIC.50to1and1*to1(ito1and2to1...10wa 80y...6to1and-'to1\n12to1aud4toI.LittleJoiin.so to1aud15to1\nj\nCardforToday.\nFirstrace,maiden two-year-olds, fivefur-\nAldebarau, 118:llymau, 106;Grand\nView,108;LongOdds,10$;Wellington, 111;\nSarahU.115;Earl,113;LolaA,115;ElsieL.105.\nSecondrace,mile—Romair, 91;Coronet-91;Falero,US;ChiefJustice. 101;CrabCider.104:LucilleMannette. 107:DvPout,109;Twenty-One,111;AlFarrow. 114:Thirdrace,selling,onemile—Coronet, 05;IronUod,101;TillieS..102:FredKnox,KB.Fourth race,handicap, mileandaneighth —Jugiirth», 100;'Harry Kay.100;Harry;.Smitn,104;Goldstone, 106;KayS.107;Bon-:HieByid.107:Yale'91,118.Fifthrace,three-year-olds, seveufurlongs!\n—Lilian Beatrice, US;Plaukshire, 117;Lord;\nWillowbrooK, 122;Goldstone, 122.Sixthrace,maidens, sixfurlongs— Tahoe,115;Dr.Owen,115;YouaudI,115;JimWhite,115;Looking Backward, 115.\nSELECTIONS.Aldebaran andElsieL.\nChiefJusticeandAlFarrow.TillieSandCoronet.RaySandBonnieByrd.\nGoldstone andLordWiilowbrook.JimWhiteandDr.Owen.\n«*»»\nCROPCONDITIONS.\nDeclineinSpring Wheat— Slight\nImprovement inCorn.\nWashington, Aug.10.— cropre-\nturnsofthedepartment ofagriculture\nshowaslightimprovement inthecon-\nditionofcorn,raisingthemonthly\naverage from81.1inJulyto32.5ill\nAugust.Inonlyfouryearssincethe\ninitiation ofcropreporting hasthere\nbeenalowerAugustcondition. Intheyearofworstfailure, 18S1,itwas79,\ndeclining to66inOctober. In18(J0itwas73,declining to70.(3in\nOctober. InAugust, ISSb\",itwas'80.7,andin1837itwas80.5,de-clininglateronlyinthelatterear.Aslightimprovement isindicated hi\nthestatesnorthoftheOhioriver,andagreateradvance inthestateswestofitheMississippi river,exceptKansas\nandNebraska. Condition ishighinnearlyalltheSouthern states,nearly\nthesameasinJulyinthebreadth west;\noftheMississippi, hitherinthelower\nstatesoftheAtlantic coast,andslightly\nlowerinAlabama andMississippi. A\nsmalldeclineisseenintheMiddleIstates,exceptNewYork,andalsoin\ntheEastern states,thoughinbothof\nthesedivisions theaverage ishigher\nthanintheWest.\nThereturns relating tospringwheatarelower,declining duringthemouthfromageneralaverageof90.9to87.3.jThereduction isfrom00to86inWis-consin, 92to87inMinnesota and9oto85inNorthDakota. TherehasbeenaslightadvanceinSouthDakota andNebraska, withnochangeinlowa.In\nthemountain statesthecondition isgenerally high.InWashington ade-clineisreported from90to87,asthere-\nsultofblighting heat,andinOregonfrom91to76.\nCondition ofothercropsaverages as\nfollows: Springrye89.8,insteadof\n92.7inJuly.Oats86.2,afallofonepoint.Barley91.1,insteadof92.Buck-wheat,acreage 101.8;condition, 92.9.Potatoes 86.8,declining from93.To-bacco88.8,afallfrom92.7.Hay,93.2.\nGOODBYE,HORSESI\nWagons MayNowBeRunbyElectricity.\nChicago, Aug,10.—Anoveltyinthewayofawagonpropelled byelectricity\nwasseenonthestreetsofChicago yes-\nterday. SometimeagoPresident J.B.McDonald, oftheAmerican Battery\ncompany, purchased several patents\nfromWilliamMorrison, ofDcsMoines.Amongotherthingswasaparkwagonequipped withasmallthree-horse-power\nmotorandtwenty-four-cell storage bat-tery.Yesterday Mr.McDonald fittedthewagonwithnewbatteries andgaveitatrial.WithfivepersonsinthewagonitleftthebarnonMonroe\nstreetandtraveled tothecompany's\noffice.Therunwasmadeintwenty-twominutes, whichwasconsidered a\nsatisfactory, considering thatthewagon\nwasdelayedatabridgeandthatfre-quentstopswere,madeonaccountofthecrowdsinthestreetsdowntown.Itiscalculated thatthewagoncanmaketenmilesanhoureasilywiththepresentmotorandcanclimbanybillinthecity.LONGSHOTSINFIRST.\nTheFavorites FindtheTo-\nbogganing VeryGoodat\nBrighton Beach.\nGoldDollar,Selling:at2to1,\nBeatenbya7to1\nChance.\nJockeyPorter Breaks His\nCollarBoneattheGar-m\nfieldTrack. |?£\nOtherJockeys Bruised—1.\n.;:•Slaughter RuledOfffor!an\nCrooked Riding;. Ijfej.\nWashington BeachRaceTrack;\nAug.10.—About4.000peoDlethisafter-\nnoonassembled atBrighton Beachand\nwitnessed (berunningoffofarather\n-poorprogramme. Natalie S,Bto1,\ntooktheopening eventfromAutocrat,\nwhohasbeen,undertheweatherfor.\nthepastfourmonths. TheMatagorda\nfillybackeddownfrom10to1to2'to1,\ndidnotshowupasgoodaswasex-\npectedanafinished'third.;Mar-\nguerite, evenmoney, favorite for\nthesecondrace.'won\"allthe.way\nwiththeGto1chance/ Podiga\nintheplace.Arnica was.backed\nheavilytobeatCrochet forthethird,\nbutthelatteralwaysheldDaly'sfilly\nsafe,andfinally passedthejudgesa\nwinnerbyonelength. GoldDollar,on\nthestrengthofhisrecentcleverper-\nformances atMonmouth,wasmadea\ntopheavyfavoriteforthefourthraceat\n2to5.Hedidnotdisplayaparticleof\nspeed,andKeyWest,7to1,wonina\ngallopfromDalsyrian, 5to1.Fagot,3\nto1,tookthetilthracefromJohn\nCavanaugh afterarattling huish,and\n1Pokino, 15to1,captured theclosing\neventafteradesperate struggle with\nGloriana, 3to1,Bsigenup.Sum-\nmaries:\nFirstrace,fivefurlongs— Natalie S.110.Simms,8to1,wonbyonelength,wint>]>i!is;Autocrat, 12:.',Flyn'n,:;to1,secondbyahead,whipping; Matagorda filly.10J,Ridg-\nley.L'to1,tliirdbyaneck,whipping. Time,\nizOSVt.Lallah, 100;Verbena, 105;Orton,\nM7;BobSutherland, Hit;HairSpring. 12);Elien,105;Brevier.IHhBoliver, 102k';Tioi;a,\n10.~,andAostralita, IW,alsoran.Secondr«ce,livefurlongs— Marguerite. OD.Flynn,evesi,woninagallopbytwolengths;Podiga, 103,Sims,ii;oI,secondijvthreelengths,whipping: Philautropbict W4,Bry-\nant.:itol,thirdbyalength,nrhippiug.Time,IXOVi.Hiram,104;LyristW2:OnceMore.IX);Freeland.Ill:HolierMoon.10i.Thirdrace,sixandhalftnrionKS—Crochet,103,Walker, 3tos,wonbyalength,whipping;Arnica, 107.Lamley. 8toS,sccou.lbyalength,whipping: Zunuiost, 107.tCoffee,thirdbyahead,whipping. Time.ItSSViBilletI)ouxcolt.112;Macintosh, 112:Tete-li-Tetetilly,!U;Tredaway, W2.alsoran.fourth race,sevenfurlongs—KeyWest\nOti,Mid^'ley, 7to1.wonbyfourlengths, gnl-loping:Dalsyrian,lii.Lamiey. :>to1,second\nbyhalfalength,whlppiug; Lorimer, Vo,N.Hiil,15toI.thirdbythreelengths,whipping.Time,1:2<1*4.GoMDollar,112^andCountess,\n90.alsoran.Fifthraw.mile—Fagot.03.Lambley, 3to1,.\nwonbyahead,whipping: JohnCavanaussh,;\n107.Walker,5to1.secondbyaneck,whip-ping:IndiaRubber, 107^,\"Coffee. 8to1,thirdbyahead,whipping. Time,I:4.'Hi.'Diekerson, 112:Frontensuce,\" 112;Sandstone,(\n102;WheelerT.104:Sandy.104,alsoran. •_;>Sixthrace,fivefurloncs—Pokiuo. 107,Sto-!val,15to1,wonbyahead,whipping; Glo-Jriana.102.Bergen,3to1.second Dytwolengths,whipping; Fionafilly.95.J.Lamb-\nley.10toI,thirdDyahead,whipping. Time.\nUMVs.Tradesman, 100:MaggieMerrellcolt.101;KingThomas. UC<&:SadieGray,104Vi;Guyali. 107;Zora,05;Etelka,102;Zeno,111):\nOliverTwist,107;PaulineHall.103,alsorun.\nBROKE HISCOIjIjAR BONE.\nN.PorterandTwoOtherKidersInjuredatGarfiekl..Chicago, Auk.10.—ilacin*•atOar-!\nfieldparktodaywassensational. In\nthefirsteventTrompeur F.11.Shiriey\nandHallowell fell,.JockeyT.Porter\nbreaking hiscollarboneandsuffering\ninternalinjuries.-JockeyPerkins and\nJ.Murphy were'badlybruised. Forpulling .Exclusion inthelastrace,Slaughter wasruledoffandallbetsde-claredvoid.Notonefavoiite won.\"Thetrackwasveryfast.Hotspur cov-veriugninefurlongsin1:54%. Sum-maries:Firstrace,five-eights ofamile—FirstWardwon.LuctUillardsecond,Panicthird.Time,\n1:U2.\nSecond race,selling,mileandfiftyyards-Fakirwon,Borealis second,St.Joe\"thirdTime,1:46.Thirdrace,selling,three-quarters otamile —Anttimu Leafwon,FredHouston second,\nFauntieroy third.Time,!:!<%.Fourth race,handicap, ninefurlongs—spurwon,Valierasecond,ErnestRacethird.Time,i:\">-i»4. /i_Fifihracetelling, quartersofamile —\n.Empress Frederick won,Warden second,AnnieMartinthird.Time,1:15V2.Sixthrace,selling,three-quarters ofamile —LittleCretewon.Rosemont second. Salva-tionthird.Time.1:14.\nATHAWTHORNE.Firstrace,sevensurlongs— BobbyBeachwon,Heading second,KayBthird\".Time,\n1:34.Secondrace,mileandseventy yards—EdLeonard won.Fannie5second^Brookwoodthird.Time,l:4l»i.i>.Thirdrace,fivefurlongs—TheReaper'won,OilGillccksecond,Mabelthird.Time,\n1:o.vFourthrace,mile—lnsolence won.Lib-rettosecond,BillyPinkerton third.Time,1:47.Fifthrace.slx furlongs— Sunshine Whiskeywon.Adriennesecond,LadyPulsifer third.Time,1:18.sixthrrtce.sevenfurlongs— Nancy:Hakeswon,Duallughes Btecud,GoodDaythird.Time,1:32. ,\nFAVORITES TAKETWO.\nTalentHasaShadetheBestofIt.atRochester.\nRochester, N.V.,Aug.10.—Two\nraceswenttofavorites today,andthethirdwenttoanoutsider. Inthefree\npaceandaeaininthe2:27trotthetalent\ncameoutwithflyingcolors,butAbbieV,inthe2:19trot,wasagreatdisap-\npointment. Itwasthegeneral im-pression thatTurnerlaidupthefirsttwoheats.Itwasagreatrace,andthosewhobackedthefieldagainstAbbieVareflushtonight,forthetalentputupbigmoneyonthegreymare.\nTheattendance wasbetter thanyesterday, andmoremoney vvent1\nintothepoolboxes. Aheavy1\nshoweratnoonmadethetrackalittle1'\nslow.Nevertheless everyheatwinnersecured anewmark.\"Egbertcuthisf\nmarkdownone-half second. AbbieVisnolongereligibleinthe2:19class.1\nMascot's bestheatwashalfasecond5\nbetterthananyprevious effort.Grant'sAbdaleah brokeBailyineveryheat,and\nTurner'smarewasalsounsteady. The!\nRavenmadeastrongbidforfirstplaceinthethirdheatofthe2:27.trot.Hecameinlameafterthefirstheat.NellieMason,ofwhomgreatthingswere)ex-pectedinthe2:19trot,didnotwarmupquicklyenough. Elke'swinofthefirstheatwasthesurprise oftheday.1\nEverybyciclesulkyonthecoursewasindemand today,andeverywinnerwasdriventoone.Onlyinoneracedidanything elseappear.Summaries:2:19class,trotting, purse$2,000—\nIllinoisEgbert.... 312131AbbieV 261312E1k0:........ 136533NellieMason. ......75322roPrinceM...... 4246roBush 54545toZeuobia ....«777CroTime.2:17.2:18.2:17,2:16%,2:l6V*,2:17%».Free-for-all pacing,purseS'.sOO—-\n\\u25a0\\u25a0\nJLWHITESPOTLESS ARMSySoftwhitehands,shapelynails,an;\nfunblemished ckin,andluxuriant hair Iareproduced bythecelebrated Ccn-JkCUEAKehedies whenailothersfail.\\Infacialblemishes, ortheseverestho-Jfmowanddiseasesoftheskinandteals,\nJLrQtfwithlossofhair,evenwhenucrofu-Vjc'loinorhereditary, theyareequallyr«*ucc»«»ful. Boideverywhere.<?Ma5c0t..................... .....1liBuncoJr.... ...*...;.....;..;322Grant'sAbdallah ....:... ..2-34Dallas.....„.....................;. ..443Time.2:l7Vi,2:12%,2:14.2:27trot,purse81,500— •\nHCT 1j!\"TheKaven.....!iH.\".il.\"V* \"'\"222Bone ...\\u25a0:\".'.;.\\u25a0;;;\":;;;;;.;.\\u25a0;. \"333AlcyoneJr............ 444Muggins;. V.........'.dis '•Time.2:20.2;l7*k,2:ICH4.-\nONAHEAVY TRACK.\nResultsofYesterday's RacesontheSaratoga Track....Saratoga, Aug.10.— trackwasheavytodayfromlastnight'srain,theskyhazyandtheattendance fair.\n\\u25a0_Firstrace,sixfurlongs— Charleruse, 102,Lendrum. lvtol,woninl:18te;Azreal,100.Grifh'u.8to5.second: Tasso, 100,Bunn.3to.>.third.Thesealsoran:Leveler, 100;KingSolomon. lot).\n:_Secondrnce.seven-eigbts ofastripe—Stoops,18,Griffin, 5to1,wonin1:0H2;Hey«elMar.103,Bunn,15to1,second; PrinceDeceiver. 10!.Porter.3to5.third.Thesealsoran:liobusta, 100;Japonica, 100;FannyCovinsrton filly,3;Gamester, <)3;Keturncolt,10\"!.\nThirdrace,three-quarters ofamile—HellGate,105,Bunn,0to5,wonin]:17Vs;Bats-man,105,Stevenson, 4to1,second; Triangle,luo,Morris.11to1,third.Thesealsoran:Laviuhi, S.I;MaryT.100;Sportsman.- W5.Fourthrace,mileandahalf—Fenelon. 108,Carter, 4to5.wonin2:42U;WarDuke,95,Sweeney, 0to1.second; Alargtherita. 10(5,-\nCovijigton. 6'to\\u25a0I.•third.Thesealsoran:AddieB.M:Baylor, '.15:Headhunt, 101:BBMi.lion.1);:Bullfinch. 101:Hevult, 10S.\n\\u25a0Fifthrace,shortsteeplechase— Futurity,It).',Lewis.2toI,wonin3:24:Westmoreland157,CarhiiL3toJ.second; SamMorse,147!\nYeach, 2)to1,third.Thesealsoran:KingofNorfolk, 15:2;canCan.147;Lijero,142;Southerner, 145.\n\\u25a0•.'••\\u25a0»':*!-Monmouth ParkCard.\nMonmoi:t!i Park,Aug. Entries\nfortomorrow: 888\nFirstrace,three-quarters ofamile—GoldDollar, 113;Kussell, 112;Correction.I11;Nomad. 103:SirMatthew. 10:5;Sonora,09;Lyceum. 93;Entre.95:TomDonobue. 0\").Second nice,seven furlongs— Kingston,120;SirMattnew, 115:Pessara. 105;Sonorn,\n98.Thirdrnce,mileandaquarter— Monana.122;Beckon, 117;Sir.Matthew, Entre,Juliesi.lit)each. fc»*Wßßfcfl«•Fourth race,fivefurlongs— Yarrow, 110:Chicago. lOo;ExtraChattanooga, 110:Moynegelding, Ml;Sodan.!>>;Risk.SweetAlice,\nHerndon. !>2;t>il\\rrQueen,8J:Charlottefilly.S5;Indigo, &>;Upstairs, 8S;LadyMary,\nFifthrace,mil.'—Loantaka, 112:AirShaft,MayWin,00;Rorka,Kildeer. 02;FairPlay,\n87..\nSixthrace,mileandasixteenth—Snow-ball,110;LongBeach.107:Trestle. 104;MayWin,102;Baiefoot,Xomad.91;Estelle, 59.\nTOPTEAMS BEATEN.\nBothBoston amiCleveland Lose\nTheirGames.\nW.L.Pet.I W.L.Pet.Cleveland... ln7.GSIPittsburg ..10U.47i>Boston 148.636Chit!f120..:.10 12.454Philadeln\"ial3 9.590Cincinnati. lo12.454NewY0rk..120.571Washinst'n 014.3918r00k1yn.. .1310.5*55Louisville.814.3&JBaltimore.. 1210.545St.Louis...(516.'-'72\nPittsburg, Aug.10.—ItwasaDitch-\ner'sbattletoday,anduptotheeighth\ninningitlooked asthoughSt.Louis\nwouldwin,butinthatinningHiehome\nteamsolved Breitensteiu andwon.\nHumbert savethevisitorsbutthreehits.Score:\nr..ii.c.Pitts.bnrg....O 0100002*— 303St.L0ui5....00002000o—2 3Batteries, Gumbert andMacK,BreitensteinandBuckley; earnedruns,Pittsbarg -':firstbasebyerrors.Pittsbr.nr 1;left:j:ibases.Pittsb-.\"irgS. siLouis8;firstbaseonballs,offBroiteusteiii (i,Gumtert 7:struckout.byBreitenstein 2;three-base-hits. Kelly.Buck-ley;two-base-hits.Mack; sacrifice hits,\nDonovan. Smith.MackForrell. Crooks,\nUrodie.Buckley: stolenbases.Smith.Mack,'\nGore,Carroll;'\ndoubleplays.Milter. Bier-\nbaneraud Unckley. Berltensiein, Brodieand.Werdeu. BrodieandWerden;pns&edballs,Buckley 1;umpire,AlcQuaid: lime.1:50.\nCINCINNATI JJUXCHED HITS.,Ci.evki.anu,- Aug.10.—AnexcitinggameofballwaslostbyCleveland to-daybecause theCincinnatis bunchedtheirhitsinoneinningandinanother\nZimmer madeacostlywildthrow.Mc-\nAleertiedthegameintheeighthfor\nCleveland bytwopoorthrowsbyHar-ringtonandHoliday. Snydersenthimbacktofirstbecause-. O'Connor inter-\nferedwithHarrington. •,Thedecision.wasright,jAfterthegameafewrow-\n.diesmadesomedemonstration against\nSnyder,butitwaspromptly quelled.\nScore:\nR.11.E.Cleveland.... 23000000o—sa4\nCincinnati. ..o0.0..05010*—093Batteries, Cuppy,andZimmer. Chamber-lainandHarrington; earnedruns.Cincin-nati5:firstbasebyerrors,Cleveland 2:leftonbasesCleveland 6.Cincinnati s;timbaseonballs,offCuppy3.Chamberlain 4:struckout,byCuppy -i.chamberlain 0;.three-basehit,McPhee'; two-base hits,McKean. O'Con-nor,Cuppy,Holliday: stolenbases.McAlcer,McPhee, Latham; doubleplays.McAleeraiidZimmer, Harrington andMcPhec. Chamber-'lain.McPheeanaCommickey, Welchand\nMcPhes toGeuins: hitbypitchers, by'Cuppy,Welch,byChamberlain,' Davis; um-\npire,Snyder;time.2:)7.\nAGItKAT HOMEI!UN.Phii.adki.imua, Aug.10.—Hamil-\n.ton'shome-run hittoextreme left\nfieldinthesecondinning,.whenthebaseswerefull,wonthegametodayforPhiladelphia. Bostonfinishedstrongly,butthehometeam'sleadwastoogreat\ntoovercome. BotnKeefeandStivettspitched goodball,buttheformerhad\nthebestofit.Alteudauce, 2,821).Score:\nR.11.E.PhiladelDhia.o 5100000*—*i71Boston 000000003—i80\nBatteries. KeefeandCross.StivetisandGanzeli; earnedruns.Philadelphia 3.Bostou2;firstbaseonerror,Boston;leftonbases,\nPhiladelphia.\", BostonJ;firstbaseonballs,\noffstivetis 4,offKeefe2:struckout.byStivetts 6,byKeefn4;homerun.Hamilton\";\ntwo-base hits.Cross,Stiveits; sacrifice hits,\nLoiik.Ilallmar.;stolen bn.se.Hamilton;doubleplays,AllentoHa;lmai>toConnor;\nCrosstolialiman; hitbypitcher, byStiveils1;passed bulln.Uanzel, Cross;umpire,Lyncb;time.1:35.\nJOXKS WASWILD.Bai.timokk, Aug.in.—Washington\nputJonesintheboxagainsttheOriolestoday,andhiswildnessinthefirstgave\nthehometeamagoodlead.Killenfin-.\nislieilthegameanddidwell.Cobbpitchedafinegame.Attendance, 1,007.\nScore:\nBaltimore.... 40I00110o—7103Washington .00000110 o—274Batteries, CobbandGuusou, Killen,Jones\nandMcGuire;earnedruns,Baltimore 2,\nWashington 1;firstbasebyerrors.Balitmore\n2.Washington 3;leftonbases.Baltimore 18,\nWashington 8:firstbaseonballs,oftCobb1.offJones 4,offKillen3;three-base hit,\nStovey;sacrificehits,Stovey,Siricker, Ward,llov,Larcin:stolenbases.Sbindle 2,Vanilaltres. stovey,Dowd2;doubleplays.Shin-\ndie.Strieker andSutcliffe, DowdandRich-\nardson.Richardson andLarkia; umpire,Gaffuey; time,1:25.\nTHEMIGHTY FALLEX.\nCnicAGO, Aug.10.—Hutchison wasknocked outoftheboxbytheColonelsinthreerounds. Withthegamelost\nAn.suuputinLuby.Hewastouchedupforfourhitsinthefourth,butafter\nthatimproved. Attendance, 1,000.\nScore:\nP..H.E.\nChicago 00300000o—374Louisville.... -I0320001o—B152\nDatteries, Hutchison, LubyandKittredge\nandSchriever Stratum andGrim;earnedruns.Chicago %Louisville 5;firstbasebyerrors,Chieaeo 2,Louisville 2;leftonbases,\nChicago 7,Louisville 12;firstbaseonballs,\noffStratum 1,Hutchison], Luby2;struckout,\nbyStratton 4.Hctcbinsop l,Luby2;three-\nbasehits.Whistler, Schriever. Da'hlen; two-\nbnsehits.Weaver, Ryan.Anson; sacrificehits,Pfeffer, Taylor. Farrotl, Jennings,\nWeaver,Brown; stolenbase,Stratton; um-pire,Hurst;time,1:50.\nNEWYORKTAKESONE.Brooklyn*, Aug.10.—Thegameat\nEastern Parkthisafternoon betweentheBrooklyns andNewYorkresultedinawell-won victoryforNewYork.\nTheNewYorksranbaseswithsurpris-ingagility. Brooklyn fielded excel-lently,butcouldnothitRusie.Score:\nR.H.EBrooklyn 00100000o—l2NewT0rt...00101101o—482\nBatteries, SteinandKinslow, RusieandEwing;earnedrun.NewYorK;firstbasebyerrors.Brooklyn 2.NewYork2;leftonbases,Brooklyn 5.NewYork4:firstbaseonballfi.off SteinRnsie4;struckout,byStein\n2.Rusie3:'sacrificehits.Corcoran. Tiernau,Ewins;stolenbases.Ward,Brouthers, Burke3,H.Lyons.Tieruan: doubleplays,Corco-ran,'WardandBiouthers, Ruste,BurkeandBoyle;pessedball,Ewing: umpire.Barnie;\ntime.1:48;attendance. 2,423.\nBecomes aFour-Club League.\nMAjaxrETTK. Wis..Aim.10.—TheWiaconsiu-Mich-Lan leagueh**b*«areorganized asafour-club league,con-,sistingofMarinette, Menominee, GreenBayandOshkosh, Marquette;andlsh-pemingdisbanding. ;Theseasonopenstomorrow withGreenBayatOshkoshandMenominee atMarinette. Secre-:taryAddis,ofMilwaukee, hasarranged\nanewschedule, whichextends the\nseasonuntilOct.5.\nTheWeather WasBad.\nGnandRapids, Mich.,Aug.10.—The\nPointer-Direct racewaspostponed on:\naccountofbadweather, andotherraces\nweredeclared off.\nGoing:toNewOrleans.\nCincinnati, 50.,Aug.10.—George\nDixon,thepugilist, accompanied byhis\nmanager, O'Kourke, reachedCincinnati\nat11:30thismorning, andafterremain-inginthecityforashorttimecon-tinuedontheirwaytoNewOrleans.\nSchaefer Challenges Ives.\nNewYoi:k,Aug.10.—APariscable,\nsays:Schaefer haschallenged Ivesto\nathreenights'contest, 800pointsup,\nbalkline,tobeplayedinanybilliard\niooinlnParisdesignated byIves,stakes\ntobe$500aside.\nTheBoys1Record Smashed.\nSiorXCity,10.,Aug.10.—Inthebicycleracesheretodayofthestate\nmeetingoftheL.A.\\V..thecontestfor\nboysundersixteenwaswonbyEarl,\nwithSchermerhorn second,.Jacksonthird.Time,:39>£,breaking theworld's\nrecord.\n.BrokeaRecord..Kxoxvn.i.i:,April—Atthedriving\nparkheretodayMadame Mafante's\nhigh-jumping poueybroketheworld's\nrecordbygoingfourfeetandahalfinch.\nMnllane Coming West.\nSpecialtotheGlooe.Blttk,Mont.,Aug. TonyMul-\nlane.pitcheroftheCincinnati's, was\nsinnedbytheButte-basebailclubtoday. 9091«^\nTHEWILMINGTON TRICK.\nUncle Sam's 'Agents Cleverly\nCatchontoIt.\nWashington, Aug.10.—SolicitorHepburn, ofthedepartment ofjustice,\ntodayinstructed theUnitedStatesdis-\ntrictattorney atPortland, Or.,tolibel\ntheBritishsteamerWilmington, andto\nprosecute withvigorsuchofherofficers\naswereconcerned intherecentattempt\nt>smuscleopiumintotheUnitedStates.According toreportsreceived attin:treasury department thisvesselhasbeenencaged forsometime insmuggling,\nopiumintotheUnitedStatesfromVic-toria,ii.C\",wherethen;isalargees-\ntablishment devoted, soitissaid,tothepreparation ofthedrugforthemarket.Themethodofsmuggling wastopack\ntheopiumintobarrelswithsomelight\nmaterial andtothrowthebarrelsinto\ntheColumbia riveratapointaboutthirtymilesbelowPortland, wherethey\nweresecuredbyconfederates inwaiting\nandtakentotheinteriorforshipment\ntotheEastern markets.\" Theauthori-\ntieshavebeenwatching thisvesselfor\nsometime,andcaptured fiveoftiiebar-relsthrownoverboard onherlasttrip,\nandinthiswaysecured goodevidenceofheroperations. RES\n>^»>\nFREETRADE IXMONEY.\nThereIsNoTariffouItalian Spon-\ndulicks.\nWashington, Aug.10.—Special\nAgentlianlon, atChicago, hasreported,\ntothetreasury department thatanItal-\nianbankinChicago isimporting\nthroughthemailslargequantities of\nItalianpapermoneyforsaletoItalians\ntosendtofriendsinItaly,andlieasked\nwhether suchimportations aresub-jecttoduty.Assistant Secretary\nCrounse hasreplied tohimthatthemoneyinquestion isnotsubjecttoduty\nunderprevious decisions allowing freeentrytoEnglish internal revenue\nstampsandMexican subsidycertificates\nonthegroundthattheyarenotgoods,waresormerchandise withinthemean-ingofthetarifflaws.•\nTheSummer TrainService tothe\nEast\nAfforded bytheLakeShoreRoute(L.\nS.&M.S.-Ky.) hasmanyattractive\nfeatures. Sixthrough trainscomprise\ntheservice, leavingChicago asfollows:\"TheFastMail,\"dailyat8a.m.,arriv-ingatNewYorknextmorning. \"The\nChicago&BostonSpecial,\" dailyat\n10:30a.m.,arriving atNewYork*2:lo,\nBoston 3:40p.in.nextday.Theequip-mentofthistrainisofaveryhigh\norder,including Wagner Vestibuled\n{Sleepers ofthelatestdesign,BuffetLibrary andSmoking Car,withbath-roomandbarbershop;DiningCarandCoaches. ThehourofarrivalinNewYorkmakesitpossible toreachalloftheprominent Eastern resortsbeforedark.\"TheAtlautic Express,\" dailyat3:10p.in.,alsohasVestibuled Sleepers,DiningCar,etc.,furnishing first-class\naccommodations ineveryway.The\n'•Chicago &NewYorkLimited.\" daily\nat5:30p.in.,withitsPrivate Compart-\nmentCarandluxurious fittings, em-\nbodiesallthatisnewandmoderninrailway transport. \"TheNewYork&BostonExpress,\" 7:45p.in.daily,hassleepertoNewYorkandBoston,arriv-inginthemorning. -'TheNewYorKExpress,\" 11:30p.in.daily,exceptSun-\njday,hasasleeper toCleveland, andfromthatpointtoNewYork.Tourist\nticketstothevariousEastern resortsarenowonsale,listofwhichwillbepromptly furnished onapplication. J.E.Hull,T.P.A.,St.Paul,Minn.;C.K.Wilber, West.Pass,Agent,Chicago.\nNorthwestern Patents.\nSpecialtotheGlobe.\nWashington\", Aug.10.—Northwest-ernpatents issuedtodayreported by\nPaul&Merwin, patent attorneys,\nGGOTemple Court,Minneapolis, andWashington, D.C.:Minnesota— Grainsampler, JohnBigelow, Minneapolis;\ndovetailine machine, CharlesCri9tador,St.Paul:dryingkiln,ChnrlesJ.Dion,\nSt.Paul;threshing machine attach-ment,FredD.Orsliak,BeaverFalls;\nwhifflelree hook.HenryE.Harris; tri-umphboilerattachment, GustafF.Johnson, Milan;circumfereuce indica-\ntorandtiregauge,PeterMcCullom, St.Paul;sparkarrester, Edward W.SmithandC.bax,Morris;justifier formatrixmachine, Wiiloughby W.StreetandC.L.Travis, Minneapolis; submarinegrapple, William D.WalshandJ.A.Dolling,Dulutb;leverforbuggytop,HansToresen, Yankton, S.D.\nGerman WheatShutOut.\nWashington, Aug.10.—Assistant\nSecretary Crouuse hasinformed Senator\nJonesofArkansas, thatthereisnoau-thorityoflawforthefreeentryofwheatbroughtfromGermany byorderofthecommissioner ofagriculture forfreedistribution asseedamongthefarmers ofArkansas. Hesaysthatwheatisdutiable attherateof25centsperbushel.\nThe$20,000,000 Heavy.\nNewYork,Aug.10.—Itwasfounduponexamination todaythatthegold\ntreasure fromFriscohadbeensafely\nlandedinthevaultsunderthesub-treasury without anymishapotherthanthebursting ofthreeoftheboxesinwhichtheweightofthemoneyhadtornoutthescrewsfromthesides.\nCAiP|:SitS!!!he!\nOITTLEmIVERSMALLPILL,9PILLS- SMALLDOSE,\njSBHfIB shallprice.:*\\u25ba\"'*WABASHA SIS. ST.PAUL- ,—^\n•^^^^^^^.•;».•»*•IIIL.IITT'™ V™CV*%CTL™I1VTT\"\n%\\i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"'^HP'\nligt NP^V OnecaseofFastBlackSatine,Hen-4OLf> z£. \"*\n\\u25a0I*'U¥\"1*'U¥\"rlettafinish,regular18cquality,\\u25a0I£|al*•—\n\"^AT•^'only „.:.:...Yard. -—^0 **\"*WASH Japanese Serge?,27inches wide,If)n -~^&gj\"1—'newdesignsforfall,shouldbe15c,*****.—<^pg»GOODSfor Yard\"—^^\n?3>~~~ yUUI/Oi Something entirely new—Figured<AJ\n&>\\u25a0—• vBerlinSerges—richblack,grounds _^»»>«( withcoloredprintings: alsobenuti-- \"\nJam **; fnlplaidsandstripes-.full 30inches•JO1rt—^B\n\\u25a0^^^~\" .widenndactually worthUse;ourA\"s*' -r^f|g^—. bargainpriceonly...Yard. .-^_^M\n:^^~*NewPrintsforFallarearriving daily;all\\u25a0—^9<P* qualities andbestassortment inthecity \\u0084,^a»\nUp), FirstFloor. —sc,7c,10c,12V2C —^^\n'^SLLADIES' Our2ocFastBlackUosefor19C—^^\n\\u25a0 . AA60 tllSOT? Our35cFastBlackHose,withsplicedQ7\\u25bc\\u25bc \"\"nUoij. heelsandtoes,for £tl\\jit\n2!FirstFloor.\"g?..\"dDr°P\"-StitchLisleHose47C••\nTT §§\n||DERBYOforSoo^w\"^Derby..Wa.ists$3.98ft\nftWAISTS. r.Gloria.?ilk.Derby.WWas;s.ts$3.75||\nW Our87.50Double-Warp SurahffK£S>lff ••\nSilkDerbyWaistsfor. «|)0.04< \\u25bc\\u25bc\nf9Our57.50ChinaSilkDerby<J»K7c*\"\n\\u25bc' Waistsfor .......'.*PO.1D.Aty\" SecondFloor. AllDerbyShirtWaistsatreduced prices,IItt——\n\\u25a0 }} ft attd ffIIUNDER- Our50cImported LisleThreadVests.QQ §§||UlHi/iil\\- lowneckandnosleeves,forO»C ff\nftWEAR.°\"r3SclDlDOrted Balbriggan VestsO\\n*'\nA)A)*f°r\"\n\\u25a0••ff11Our75cEcruLisleTights,ankleorK/1/, ###8 kneelengths,only OftC TT^\nfl]^1FirstFloor.AfewmoreoftheSI.OOUnionSuitsAOn ,*m£g^^ FirstFloor. at frOC'±_i5\n.»-LINEN ASPECIALBARGAININNAPKINS.\njtfc__:l.300dozenPureLinenGerman-Made Nan- \"\"\"^? -DEPTkins-size2-x-2inches,softfinish,worth—^^\nC»^—' ***-•*.*•*1.35anywhere: ourspecialpriceonly-jgD$1.00theDozen.Z^m&Z REMNANTS 0?TABLELINENS -*»\ngg^ Haveaccumulated atanalarming rateduring'\"*J*21_ therecentClearingSnle.Tobecomearera--\n\\u25a0<» •^'nantmeanstolosepricedljrnity.Thelengths\\u25a0—•*&£&>—\n\\u25a0_i, arefromH2to3V»yards.Takeyourchoice __**£\nf^P~>i FirstFloor. ataverysmallprice.\"\n*\\u25a0*,tXIIt,»\n%Srsia?hI?VANS* -^Sg^ &rnnmn~rliniini ST.PAUL.—«w^'\n\\u25a04^Globe,Aug.11. .\nSs**4/4/rji NotSuscePtiblßtoBribes.I\n%(xCx0st\\/ Alargecontractor anxiousif J&J:JcLafs'^'-toprocureadesirable con-*|**wPTga^»a^^^ tracthanded theofficiala% *~\n„-—•««. fifty-dollar bill,whichhe**#f t&coollyusedasacigarlighter. &'\n« w^J^**'Notnecessary tobribeour% *Jkf»/customers. Ourgoodssellon$ *y\\\"'/il\\\\.-tig/ theirmerits. &I/3#§f^ $5.00I*/S\"jL«YuV^Pk^i ForGentlemen's TaDor-ilade %%#a'sbu«jS^\\>'l^/ r^JiPerfect-Fitting Summer*\n5Wtillvl *1ifiT^^^^^^V /\\J^\\%itIIr¥* rf^ *Wsi!li&}*k\\u25a0VSpty^'vjNi J\\Trousers.*\n¥W^W'vTf°l/l\\iJ\\,HowaboutUnlaundered1Imj^jaLj/jg;<(JjP\\^sl Shirtsfor$1.00?I\n1A^^Mf^43dsemi=Annuai|If\"%^/^^4RedFigureSalel|\nij^njA^^/ BOSTON|I-^pA^iiiT^ru #One-Price Clothinglouse,\n1f^AV^t\\\\J}^ THmDST*'ST'PAUL-\nj|II*\"^^T>''{&2S^^*^\\\\ Orderssolicited*\n$If——V\\\"\"ll\\V \\\\andgivenpromptAttention through**\nI|—\\\\** *•ourMailOrderDepartment. .g\nTWINCITYJOCKEYCLUB\nSeventeenDays'RunningMeeting\nRACECOURSE\nStateFairGrounds, Hamline.\nCommencing DerbyDay,Tuesday, July26,Ending\nSaturday, August13.\nFiveormoreraceseachday.Thefirstracepromptly at3o'clock\nTherewillpositively beuopostponement onaccountofweather—run,\nrainorshine.\nTrainswillrunfromUnionDepotsofbothcitiesdirectlytorace\nCourseevery15minutes, beginning at1:30o'clockonallRaceDays.\nElectriccarsfrombothcitiesdirecttogrounds.\nE^\"Admission—$1,including1GrandStand.\nMS.ergLUol•MANHUUI)Kuaum*W^v&JFl*VCDAIiiQU SIERVIIIEthegreatnerveandbrainjlt^N Vi£*?wrHNlvn nCnflllCfrestorer. AGuaranteed\nvifes^ffl^specificforfitsandNeuralgia, Hysteria, Dizziness, Convulsions\"^ttSaAaL __JP\\u25a0Vr^figlfefr Nervous Prostration, causedbytheuseoftobaccooralcohol,NgUllsrVJfck msb£r^m&z£Bi& Wakefulness, MentalDepression, SofteniigoftheBrain,Loss;'...•before AMDafter usK,,ofpowerineithersex.Involuntary Louies,Spermatorrhoea.\ncausedbyoverexertionofthebrain,self-abuse andoverindulgence..Wegiveawritten guar-\nanteewithsixboxestocureanycaseorrefundthemoney. ,00ABOX6BOXESFDR8500SPANISH MEDICINE CO.,Madridspam. BranchOtTIcb,U.S?A. DetroitMich.\nTorsaleinSt.PaulbyTictmor <ScJagger,RyanHotelDrugStore.3DiEobertSU«^\\\n\\u25a0*\"IJf" }

[ -0.05922149494290352, 0.04816921055316925, -0.02024286426603794, 0.006196373607963324, -0.002440755721181631, 0.0026152387727051973, 0.08290354907512665, 0.030200719833374023, -0.023821478709578514, -0.009278897196054459, 0.08336061239242554, 0.005555541720241308, -0.01258009672164917, -0.09210139513015747, -0.042401909828186035, 0.016608351841568947, 0.003999264910817146, 0.05059608817100525, -0.05855955928564072, 0.039185941219329834, 0.04504349082708359, 0.0610901415348053, -0.00424366258084774, 0.022949935868382454, 0.05851619318127632, 0.011591167189180851, -0.03692786023020744, -0.04921761155128479, -0.029370352625846863, -0.05395958200097084, 0.061090923845767975, 0.0649101659655571, 0.010591424070298672, -0.004498043097555637, 0.08256997168064117, 0.00786223728209734, 0.07484567165374756, -0.023403408005833626, 0.0016536501934751868, 0.0006808015168644488, 0.024118054658174515, 0.013975935988128185, 0.013102162629365921, 0.017337488010525703, -0.010154425166547298, 0.05315389856696129, 0.030061975121498108, -0.013945380225777626, -0.04737062752246857, 0.022275438532233238, -0.05624781548976898, -0.037783797830343246, 0.06086836755275726, 0.026566265150904655, -0.036029838025569916, -0.04714620113372803, 0.027417033910751343, 0.05193231999874115, -0.05794042348861694, -0.04679877683520317, -0.03376983478665352, -0.03580206632614136, 0.036151230335235596, -0.021622024476528168, 0.027005797252058983, 0.10561131685972214, 0.03503461927175522, -0.18357330560684204, 0.014243527315557003, -0.141452819108963, 0.03895225003361702, -0.030984899029135704, -0.065403051674366, -0.010197865776717663, 0.005728894378989935, -0.012923958711326122, -0.03222578763961792, 0.16630800068378448, 0.021298056468367577, -0.09798052161931992, -0.007329431362450123, -0.021267112344503403, 0.0017305216751992702, -0.009978425689041615, 0.018995296210050583, -0.049720872193574905, -0.030458176508545876, -0.014858413487672806, 0.07630128413438797, 0.03027326613664627, 0.11504796147346497, -0.07285086065530777, 0.043779466301202774, -0.016988864168524742, 0.013404451310634613, -0.025774432346224785, 0.018830865621566772, -0.008914844132959843, 0.04681989923119545, 0.06310256570577621, -0.02670711651444435, 0.05091234669089317, -0.13746173679828644, -0.043213799595832825, 0.020655514672398567, -0.012141121551394463, -0.005346015561372042, 0.03758249804377556, -0.02546635828912258, 0.007300679571926594, 0.06636666506528854, -0.04879572615027428, 0.03062032163143158, -0.009022875688970089, 0.0449330173432827, 0.03939210623502731, -0.02040964923799038, 0.0369425043463707, 0.03498505800962448, -0.07438712567090988, 0.009151611477136612, 0.05066920071840286, -0.027672309428453445, 0.022716829553246498, 0.03199324756860733, -0.08807678520679474, -0.014007439836859703, 3.363216438029247e-33, 0.018908875063061714, 0.04956311732530594, -0.059493616223335266, -0.0016710077179595828, -0.018418585881590843, 0.016965124756097794, 0.052320342510938644, 0.02620968595147133, -0.004259733948856592, -0.07740478962659836, -0.04204147681593895, -0.031764812767505646, 0.068201944231987, -0.02670278213918209, -0.04492145776748657, 0.06968491524457932, -0.042211804538965225, -0.004194411914795637, 0.03990329056978226, 0.01261530164629221, 0.1346832811832428, -0.0625835657119751, 0.06782859563827515, -0.011622510850429535, -0.08843556046485901, 0.03821935877203941, -0.0958637148141861, -0.028749747201800346, -0.05589669197797775, 0.014119390398263931, 0.00852218922227621, -0.02200590819120407, 0.17485889792442322, 0.036094192415475845, 0.06145231053233147, 0.08272986859083176, 0.004077231511473656, 0.025674384087324142, -0.029885873198509216, 0.04298694431781769, 0.048421796411275864, 0.05483948066830635, 0.0535205602645874, -0.0037270032335072756, -0.012730634771287441, -0.03884286433458328, 0.05113812908530235, 0.0480218268930912, 0.04424538090825081, 0.041053496301174164, 0.04442823305726051, 0.06351923942565918, 0.06680389493703842, 0.0022759740240871906, -0.03054138831794262, -0.026536719873547554, 0.0028422847390174866, 0.04257988557219505, 0.006927343551069498, 0.0407482348382473, 0.07651126384735107, 0.08023042976856232, -0.05826260522007942, 0.01463054958730936, -0.11234007030725479, -0.024837348610162735, -0.009308249689638615, 0.04109082743525505, 0.039879221469163895, -0.08210083842277527, 0.026892559602856636, -0.02022968791425228, 0.017505018040537834, -0.006579654756933451, -0.012973983772099018, -0.0670337826013565, 0.002726685255765915, -0.04958421736955643, 0.012887600809335709, -0.057799823582172394, -0.011103573255240917, -0.10994862765073776, -0.03587128967046738, -0.014967590570449829, -0.06695686280727386, -0.057658739387989044, 0.040576089173555374, 0.05169883370399475, -0.018817057833075523, -0.06478879600763321, 0.061657506972551346, 0.008870504796504974, -0.04412217065691948, 0.017640482634305954, 0.12958766520023346, -2.806384947715722e-33, -0.00182714790571481, -0.02251277305185795, -0.03209305182099342, -0.051572397351264954, -0.008669422939419746, -0.05999169498682022, 0.029133185744285583, -0.04242008551955223, -0.011440467089414597, -0.049008600413799286, 0.010658708401024342, -0.13778764009475708, -0.003015161259099841, 0.08747889846563339, -0.05438178777694702, 0.08034206926822662, -0.06562168896198273, 0.02760445326566696, 0.01008737925440073, 0.03433762863278389, 0.01367716584354639, 0.03378596156835556, -0.07389311492443085, 0.07542365789413452, -0.07013163715600967, 0.058905526995658875, 0.07773567736148834, -0.06659340113401413, 0.06234331056475639, -0.0345764197409153, -0.02666201815009117, 0.01263475138694048, -0.08983859419822693, 0.014022788032889366, 0.020418573170900345, -0.006892835255712271, 0.037215761840343475, -0.010553463362157345, -0.04783828556537628, -0.01074379961937666, 0.019532404839992523, 0.09346509724855423, -0.05889810249209404, 0.05130806192755699, 0.023144545033574104, 0.03515314310789108, -0.03511514142155647, 0.0839795172214508, -0.0017860743682831526, 0.023930102586746216, 0.005570192821323872, -0.023277737200260162, 0.07914303988218307, 0.07504017651081085, 0.00250898115336895, 0.03051559440791607, 0.02801813930273056, 0.02683640457689762, -0.11471719294786453, 0.01135000865906477, 0.0021485723555088043, -0.0054283905774354935, -0.0315665602684021, 0.008261403068900108, 0.06726797670125961, -0.023144448176026344, -0.0032609174959361553, -0.013136610388755798, 0.0647813007235527, 0.0009204004891216755, 0.003643025178462267, -0.15437276661396027, -0.08756788820028305, -0.12892545759677887, 0.0052832141518592834, -0.0030506292823702097, -0.006217894610017538, 0.03154800087213516, -0.00017314041906502098, 0.029980948194861412, 0.03486420214176178, -0.08419497311115265, 0.013383856043219566, 0.04372338950634003, 0.0497090183198452, 0.02372800000011921, 0.046964436769485474, -0.04647110775113106, -0.018007684499025345, 0.04763725772500038, -0.013326755724847317, 0.013158967718482018, 0.005870576482266188, 0.025514040142297745, 0.06299886852502823, -5.3776563646579234e-8, 0.025169216096401215, -0.02337988279759884, -0.06847604364156723, 0.0603175163269043, 0.10142068564891815, -0.05942951887845993, -0.008798109367489815, 0.04550953209400177, -0.15710316598415375, -0.045881543308496475, 0.020698389038443565, -0.017622916027903557, -0.08511044085025787, -0.06431987881660461, 0.055296942591667175, 0.006279566790908575, -0.058011651039123535, -0.005094523075968027, -0.04671202600002289, -0.020168010145425797, -0.023799080401659012, -0.05275377258658409, -0.04352552071213722, -0.032964590936899185, -0.04865143075585365, -0.01810551807284355, 0.05383485555648804, 0.035629112273454666, 0.05927661806344986, -0.036054112017154694, -0.018663330003619194, -0.04163747280836105, 0.011483646929264069, -0.05788125842809677, -0.07225003838539124, -0.02502855844795704, 0.004212324507534504, 0.018159274011850357, 0.013287217356264591, 0.0302385613322258, -0.06152733787894249, 0.024612808600068092, 0.022217096760869026, 0.018838657066226006, 0.02982269786298275, -0.018232231959700584, -0.1057792454957962, -0.10532759875059128, 0.013134711422026157, -0.0666583925485611, 0.013436253182590008, -0.043052297085523605, 0.03581765666604042, 0.08950527012348175, 0.02512410469353199, 0.037625692784786224, -0.037259746342897415, 0.006577734835445881, -0.0008780443458817899, 0.0370057187974453, 0.06589342653751373, 0.048029255121946335, -0.003103048074990511, -0.005406796932220459 ]

{ "pdf_file": "RH7T2UORLNLLG7HRFR3HL7W572F5S6YY.pdf", "text": "BEFORE THE TAX COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO \nIn the Matter of the Protest of \n \n[REDACTED] , \n \n Petitioner. ) \n) \n) \n) \n) \n) \nDOCKET NO. 16003 \n \nDECISION \nOn August 7, 2001, the Tax Discovery Bureau (Bureau) of the Idaho State Tax C ommission \nissued a Notice of Deficiency Determ ination to [Redacted] (taxpayer), proposing incom e tax, \npenalty, and interest for 1996 and 1997 in the total am ount of $4,793. \nThe taxpayer filed a timely appeal. He did not request a hearing, but he subm itted additional \ninform ation. The Tax Com mission, having reviewed the file, hereby issues its decision based upon \nthe inform ation contained in the file. \n Because Tax Com mission records showed the taxpa yer had not filed Idaho resident incom e tax \nreturns for the years 1996 and 1997, the Bureau conducte d research to verify the taxpayer’s residency \nand filing requirem ent. The taxpayer’s residenc y was confirm ed and Idaho source incom e was \nidentified for each year. \n [Redacted] . [Redacted] . [Redacted] . \n Idaho Code § 63-3045 (1)(a) states: \n 63-3045. Notice of redetermination or deficiency -- \nInterest. (1) (a) If, in the case of any taxpayer, the state tax \ncommission determ ines that there is a deficiency in respect of the tax \nimposed by this title, the state tax com mission shall, im mediately \nupon discovery thereof, send notice of such deficiency to the taxpayer \nby registered or certified m ail or by other com mercial delivery \nservice providing proof of deliver y, whichever is the m ost cost \nefficient. The notice shall be sent to the taxpayer' s last address known \nto the state tax com mission. The notice of deficiency shall be \naccom panied by an explanation of the specific reason for the \ndeterm ination and an explanation of the taxpayer' s right to appeal. \nDECISION -1 \n[Redacted] Within sixty-three (63) days after such notice is m ailed, the taxpayer \nmay, at his option, file a protes t in writing with the state tax \ncommission and obtain redeterm ination of the deficiency.\n \n The taxpayer did not respond to correspondence. Therefore, the Bureau issued a Notice of \nDeficiency Determ ination. In response to the notice, the taxpayer sent a letter of appeal. He said he \nwas di sputing the determ ination because he was m arried and had two m inor children living with him \nduring both of the years at issue. He included a da te of birth and a social security num ber for his \nwife and each child. In addition, he said the actual 1997 incom e amount was less than the am ount \nthe Bureau used to determ ine the Idaho tax due for that year. The taxpayer furnished no further \ninform ation. \n The Bureau expanded its research to determ ine the accuracy of the taxpayer’s claim s. \nBecause the inform ation provided by the taxpayer appear ed to be m ore accurate than the information \nused to prepare the deficiency notice, the Bureau sent the taxpayer a revised determ ination. The \namended determ ination did not include a deficien cy for 1997 becau se the new computation resulted \nin no tax due. The Bureau advised the taxpayer the determ ination of a deficiency for 1997 was \ncanceled and asked him to accept the revised am ounts for 1996. The taxpayer did not respond and \nhis file was transferred to the Legal/Tax Policy Division for adm inistrative review. \n On April 12, 2002, the Tax Com mission received th e taxpayer’s Idaho returns for the years \n1997, 1998, and 1999 along with a letter that was signed by the taxpayer. In the letter, the taxpayer \nsaid he had decided to withdraw his protest regarding the 1996 tax year and accept the Bureau’s \nrevised determ ination of tax due. \n Secondly, the taxpayer asked to have the re fund shown in his 1997 Idaho return applied \nagainst his 1996 liability. He said he was not aware of a statute that allows a taxing authority to \nwithhold refunds while continuing to collect taxes beyond a specific tim e fram e. \nDECISION -2 \n[Redacted] Idaho Code lim its the tim e allowed for a ref und to be credited or refunded. Idaho Code \n§ 63-3072(c) states: \n Idaho Code § 63-3072. Credits and Refunds. . . . \n(c) Except as provided in subs ection (e) of section 63-3035, Idaho \nCode, a claim for credit or refund of tax, penalties, or interest paid \nshall be m ade within the later of three (3) years of the due date of the \nreturn, without regard to extensions, or three (3) years from the date \nthe return was filed. However, with regard to rem ittances received \nwith an extension of time to f ile, or a tentative return, a claim for \ncredit or refund of such rem ittances shall be m ade within three (3) \nyears from the due date of the return without regard to extensions. \n \n Idaho Code § 63-3035(e) lim its the tim e for an employee to claim a credit or refund of \nmonies that have been deducted from wages as follows: \n Idaho Code § 63-3035. . . . (e) Am ounts deducted from \nwages of an em ployee during any calendar year in accordance with \nthe provisions of this section shall be considered to be in part \npaym ent of the tax im posed on such employee for his tax year which \nbegins within such calendar y ear and the return m ade by the \nemployer under this subsection (e) shall be accepted by the state tax \ncommission as evidence in favor of the em ployee of the am ount so \ndeducted from his wages. W here the total am ount so deducted \nexceeds the am ount of tax on the em ployee, based on his Idaho \ntaxable incom e, or where his incom e is not taxable under this act, the \nstate tax commission shall, after examining the annual return filed by \nthe em ployee in accordance with this act, but not later than sixty (6 0) \ndays after the filing of each retu rn, refund the am ount of the excess \ndeducted. No credit or refund shall be made to an employee w ho \nfails to file his return, as requi red under this act, w ithin three (3) \nyears from the due date of the return, w ithout regard to \nextensions, in respect of w hich th e tax w ithheld might have been \ncredited. In the event that the exce ss tax deducted is less than one \ndollar ($1.00), no refund shall be m ade unless specifically requested \nby the taxpayer at the tim e such return is filed. (Em phasis added.) \n Idaho Code § 63-3032 defines the due date of Idaho incom e tax returns: \n Idaho Code § 63-3032. Time for filing inco me ta x retu rns. \n(1) Except as provided in section 63-3033, Idaho Code: \n (a) Returns m ade on the basis of the calendar year shall be \nfiled in the of fice of the Id aho state tax com mission on or \nbefore the 15th day of Apr il following the close of the \nDECISION -3 \n[Redacted] calendar year and returns m ade on the basis of a fiscal year \nshall be f iled in the of fice of the Idaho state tax com mission \non or before the 15th day of the fourth m onth following the \nclose of the fiscal year. \n The taxpayer had a requirem ent to file an Idaho individual incom e tax return for both 1996 \nand 1997. He did not file either return in a tim ely m anner as required by Idaho Code. In fact, he did \nnot file the 1997 return until April 12, 2002, long afte r the Bureau contacted him . He did not \ncomplete and file a return for 1996. Rather, th e taxpayer accepted the Bureau’s determ ination for \nthat year. \n The taxpayer’s request for a credit or ref und of the am ount shown as a refund in the 1997 \nIdaho incom e tax return the taxpayer subm itted f or filing with the Tax Com mission on \nApril 12, 2002, is denied. \n WHEREFORE, the Notice of Deficiency Determ ination dated August 7, 2001, is hereby \nMODIFIED, and as so m odified, is APPROVED, AFFIRMED, and MADE FINAL. \nIT IS ORDERED and THIS DOES ORDER that the taxpayer pay the following tax, penalty, \nand interest. \nYEAR TAX PENALTY INTEREST TOTAL\n1996 \n1997 $291 \n 0 $73 \n 0 $116 \n 0 $480 \n 0\n TOTAL DUE $480 \n Interest is com puted through May 1, 2002. \n DEMAND for im mediate paym ent of the foregoing am ount is hereby m ade and given. \n An explanation of taxpayer’s right to appeal this decision is enclosed with this decision. \n DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2002. \n \n IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION \n \n \nDECISION -4 \n[Redacted] \n C OMMISSIONER \n \n \n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE \n \n I hereby certify that I have on this _____ day of _________________, 2002, serv ed a copy of the \nwithin and foregoing DECISION by se nding the sam e by United States m ail, postage prepaid, in an \nenvelope addressed to: \n[Redacted] Receipt No. [Redacted]\n[Redacted]\n \n \n \n ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 1 \nDECISION -5 \n[Redacted] " }

[ -0.02132274955511093, 0.074498251080513, 0.019912956282496452, 0.0266751516610384, -0.018594222143292427, -0.06310053914785385, 0.024476122111082077, 0.032252825796604156, -0.005713794380426407, 0.017009185627102852, -0.0341215506196022, -0.02948039397597313, -0.011838577687740326, -0.0004882877692580223, 0.010586556047201157, -0.01706600934267044, 0.05745898559689522, -0.062044382095336914, -0.14504306018352509, -0.005233873147517443, 0.053382936865091324, -0.019551286473870277, -0.015931300818920135, 0.017841743305325508, 0.01450448390096426, -0.034775037318468094, -0.08895649760961533, 0.05254635214805603, -0.03656735271215439, 0.0837513729929924, -0.0634922981262207, -0.0390961654484272, -0.05431076139211655, 0.024144750088453293, 0.020517805591225624, -0.09173601120710373, -0.04797876998782158, 0.052056971937417984, -0.08186736702919006, -0.003471967065706849, -0.019513990730047226, -0.024374738335609436, 0.006240448448807001, 0.023307055234909058, 0.01983627863228321, -0.015070862136781216, -0.06609796732664108, -0.02179081179201603, -0.023955581709742546, -0.08169104903936386, 0.027012521401047707, 0.0830875113606453, 0.009423833340406418, 0.06578280031681061, -0.037998050451278687, -0.027602002024650574, -0.10290873050689697, -0.01678749918937683, -0.05151700973510742, -0.03781329095363617, 0.015598027966916561, -0.01189688965678215, -0.0065311649814248085, 0.015406790189445019, 0.041216153651475906, -0.09646408259868622, 0.08551272004842758, -0.0613139346241951, 0.04110565781593323, 0.034126102924346924, -0.046205129474401474, -0.021871274337172508, -0.009649676270782948, -0.03543281555175781, -0.014583022333681583, -0.0429837591946125, -0.0005058025126345456, -0.03414568677544594, -0.020761428400874138, -0.09506495296955109, 0.005225033033639193, -0.038690511137247086, 0.014984825626015663, -0.11096230149269104, -0.1208326444029808, 0.02145954966545105, -0.016810394823551178, 0.09943591058254242, 0.02258276380598545, 0.07820747047662735, -0.03193745017051697, 0.03092365153133869, 0.06328106671571732, -0.059175461530685425, 0.02551763877272606, 0.06431297957897186, 0.07058540731668472, 0.11588063091039658, 0.1008603498339653, -0.06688542664051056, -0.016689153388142586, 0.025812942534685135, -0.0845952033996582, 0.023404447361826897, -0.026667052879929543, 0.024756867438554764, 0.011807618662714958, 0.0390864759683609, -0.028472160920500755, 0.03336985781788826, 0.0477755032479763, 0.0537412166595459, 0.05523106828331947, -0.05613209307193756, 0.00042737406329251826, 0.08175762742757797, -0.011576239950954914, 0.06561986356973648, 0.0773831233382225, 0.07432124763727188, -0.062064703553915024, -0.033877771347761154, 0.052206989377737045, 0.011700965464115143, 0.03159366548061371, 0.006117931101471186, 0.03438688442111015, 7.32068567801747e-33, -0.05228929594159126, 0.0056023066863417625, 0.0062283617444336414, -0.0000028534720968309557, -0.031636793166399, -0.022538622841238976, -0.07331807166337967, 0.005422750487923622, 0.05220692232251167, 0.004706032574176788, 0.005677342414855957, -0.05594005063176155, -0.03424509987235069, 0.03824184834957123, -0.024349328130483627, -0.026367763057351112, 0.1039506122469902, -0.007164977490901947, -0.01695926859974861, -0.07315187901258469, -0.023745190352201462, 0.029658997431397438, -0.004272649064660072, 0.027488764375448227, 0.021900109946727753, 0.10565125197172165, 0.039512213319540024, -0.04976334422826767, -0.10882902890443802, 0.009290301240980625, 0.02004086971282959, -0.015893185511231422, -0.055680643767118454, 0.06354090571403503, 0.013309774920344353, 0.0043008169159293175, 0.011179602704942226, 0.0893821120262146, 0.01985975168645382, -0.0012818098766729236, 0.03812454640865326, -0.03244120255112648, 0.03091789223253727, -0.06041200831532478, -0.014282137155532837, -0.040630076080560684, -0.0007147849537432194, 0.11244536191225052, -0.0072734360583126545, 0.02898593619465828, 0.03615350276231766, 0.04711156710982323, 0.09983096271753311, -0.018820002675056458, 0.04176883399486542, 0.11064114421606064, -0.006408624816685915, -0.11000867187976837, 0.057464417070150375, 0.05310388281941414, -0.019203761592507362, 0.08603643625974655, -0.04685714468359947, 0.00021015053789597005, 0.015772519633173943, 0.04609372839331627, -0.04299508035182953, -0.045699842274188995, 0.043521277606487274, 0.04893290624022484, -0.006150198634713888, -0.01971975713968277, 0.0076956190168857574, -0.007831781171262264, 0.07049020379781723, 0.05063830688595772, 0.08017081022262573, -0.040915653109550476, -0.08344558626413345, 0.003889579325914383, -0.07415135204792023, 0.06727610528469086, -0.014024290256202221, -0.12800250947475433, 0.01345091499388218, -0.06853708624839783, -0.08270691335201263, 0.033091090619564056, 0.02160375565290451, 0.03321192413568497, -0.05570239573717117, -0.09380178153514862, -0.10164449363946915, 0.08758498728275299, 0.010248841717839241, -7.773911483972419e-33, 0.10084574669599533, 0.0060933781787753105, 0.02394360862672329, 0.03832690790295601, 0.007763383910059929, 0.0230255164206028, 0.024110419675707817, -0.03947041183710098, 0.0055738999508321285, -0.01740853860974312, -0.05430036783218384, 0.008071518503129482, 0.07415032386779785, -0.0025561065413057804, -0.0036565284244716167, -0.04454521834850311, 0.0239826999604702, 0.006304297596216202, -0.036533717066049576, -0.02067059464752674, -0.03410458564758301, 0.006037806160748005, -0.06843970715999603, -0.00531816016882658, -0.09783773124217987, -0.024458440020680428, -0.07152441143989563, -0.03787902370095253, 0.02414250187575817, -0.04606953263282776, 0.041466690599918365, 0.016122382134199142, -0.021615713834762573, -0.035052742809057236, -0.029425309970974922, -0.03868452087044716, 0.005184032954275608, 0.06746810674667358, 0.004564035218209028, -0.06928382813930511, 0.07454469054937363, -0.017429906874895096, -0.05065552517771721, 0.07738377898931503, -0.05685308203101158, -0.01840829662978649, 0.0058463579043745995, -0.09749801456928253, 0.09667320549488068, 0.08880776911973953, 0.04048897325992584, -0.07697231322526932, -0.07732093334197998, 0.0637880340218544, 0.0823572427034378, -0.009754100814461708, 0.04832225292921066, -0.04090406373143196, -0.03775433823466301, -0.01232239045202732, 0.11165516823530197, -0.024656329303979874, 0.0545593798160553, 0.09664609283208847, -0.01138426922261715, -0.055964697152376175, -0.05824527144432068, 0.07721713185310364, -0.030285071581602097, 0.030749181285500526, 0.0023648201022297144, -0.015695206820964813, -0.0011950804619118571, -0.0535450242459774, -0.012415390461683273, -0.03659418597817421, 0.06289788335561752, -0.014651590958237648, 0.06643475592136383, 0.038302551954984665, -0.04290194809436798, 0.011845172382891178, -0.028447093442082405, 0.06297361105680466, 0.03682853281497955, -0.02647021785378456, -0.026057379320263863, 0.05651054158806801, -0.0030037122778594494, -0.02255883999168873, 0.054106373339891434, 0.010246075689792633, 0.023864425718784332, 0.05902152135968208, -0.1076616644859314, -5.4213849409734394e-8, 0.03992437198758125, -0.04939892143011093, 0.07585107535123825, 0.05551706627011299, -0.03462383896112442, 0.024702157825231552, 0.007379990536719561, 0.013763335533440113, -0.05124252662062645, 0.021281380206346512, 0.04127836972475052, 0.02983931265771389, 0.04961216077208519, 0.03385675325989723, -0.05895069241523743, -0.04619411379098892, 0.010872040875256062, 0.0012583183124661446, 0.021350132301449776, -0.10179879516363144, 0.006429942324757576, -0.09055405855178833, -0.0016626855358481407, 0.05437175929546356, 0.04588770493865013, -0.012710834853351116, -0.022536251693964005, 0.053317565470933914, 0.001188186346553266, 0.06237541511654854, -0.13715220987796783, 0.004386229440569878, -0.00868852436542511, -0.0001965704868780449, -0.0023054764606058598, -0.06979819387197495, 0.10617329180240631, 0.05728909745812416, -0.06190738454461098, -0.0513618141412735, 0.045121703296899796, -0.06914390623569489, 0.01973189413547516, -0.041374772787094116, 0.040132664144039154, -0.11769062280654907, -0.08402390033006668, -0.0072107333689928055, -0.02995196171104908, 0.0650230199098587, 0.04360801354050636, -0.05617007985711098, -0.0013514774618670344, 0.0665903091430664, -0.010531438514590263, -0.010071656666696072, -0.009485267102718353, -0.00569437351077795, 0.10189275443553925, -0.0013841685140505433, 0.03030814602971077, 0.022915594279766083, -0.049695029854774475, -0.048272568732500076 ]

{ "pdf_file": "WQJIWQYIILMRDH2S47HSUWZ55PQ2YDI4.pdf", "text": "2.6 Automobile Body Incineration\nThe information presented in this section has been reviewed but not updated since it was\noriginally prepared because no recent data were found and it is rarely practiced today. Auto bodies arelikely to be shredded or crushed and used as scrap metal in secondary metal production operations, whichare discussed in Chapter 12 (Metallurgical Industry).\n2.6.1 Process Description\nAuto incinerators consist of a single primary combustion chamber in which one or several\npartially stripped cars are burned. (Tires are removed.) Approximately 30 to 40 minutes is required toburn two bodies simultaneously.\n2As many as 50 cars per day can be burned in this batch-type operation,\ndepending on the capacity of the incinerator. Continuous operations in which cars are placed on aconveyor belt and passed through a tunnel-type incinerator have capacities of more than 50 cars per8-hour day.\n2.6.2 Emissions And Controls\n1\nBoth the degree of combustion as determined by the incinerator design and the amount of\ncombustible material left on the car greatly affect emissions. Temperatures on the order of 650°C(1200°F) are reached during auto body incineration.\n2This relatively low combustion temperature is a\nresult of the large incinerator volume needed to contain the bodies as compared with the small quantity ofcombustible material. The use of overfire air jets in the primary combustion chamber increasescombustion efficiency by providing air and increased turbulence.\nIn an attempt to reduce the various air pollutants produced by this method of burning, some auto\nincinerators are equipped with emission control devices. Afterburners and low-voltage electrostaticprecipators have been used to reduce particulate emissions; the former also reduces some of the gaseousemissions.\n3,4When afterburners are used to control emissions, the temperature in the secondary\ncombustion chamber should be at least 815°C (1500°F). Lower temperatures result in higher emissions.Emission factors for auto body incinerators are presented in Table 2.6-1. Particulate matter is likely to bemostly in the PM-10 range, but no data are available to support this hypothesis. Although no data areavailable, emissions of HCl are expected due to the increased use of chlorinated plastic materials inautomobiles.\n10/92\n(Reformatted 1/95) Solid Waste Disposal 2.6-1 Table 2.6-1 (English And Metric Units). EMISSION FACTORS FOR AUTO BODY\nINCINERATIONa\nEMISSION FACTOR RATING: D\nPollutantsUncontrolled With Afterburner\nlb/car kg/car lb/car kg/car\nParticulatesb2 0.9 1.5 0.68\nCarbon monoxidec2.5 1.1 Neg Neg\nTOC (as CH4)c0.5 0.23 Neg Neg\nNitrogen oxides (NO2)d0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01\nAldehydes (HCOH)d0.2 0.09 0.06 0.03\nOrganic acids (acetic)d0.21 0.10 0.07 0.03\naBased on 250 lb (113 kg) of combustible material on stripped car body.\nbReferences 2 and 4.\ncBased on data for open burning and References 2 and 5.\ndReference 3.\nReferences For Section 2.6\n1.Air Pollutant Emission Factors Final Report , National Air Pollution Control Administration,\nDurham, NC, Contract Number CPA-22-69-119, Resources Research Inc. Reston, VA,April 1970.\n2. E. R. Kaiser and J. Tolcias, \"Smokeless Burning Of Automobile Bodies\", Journal of the Air\nPollution Control Association ,12:64-73, February 1962.\n3. F. M. Alpiser, \"Air Pollution From Disposal Of Junked Autos\", Air Engineering ,10:18-22,\nNovember 1968.\n4. Private communication with D. F. Walters, U. S. DHEW, PHS, Division of Air Pollution,\nCincinnati, OH, July 19, 1963.\n5. R. W. Gerstle and D. A. Kemnitz, \"Atmospheric Emissions From Open Burning\", Journal of the\nAir Pollution Control Association ,17:324-327. May 1967.\n2.6-2 EMISSION FACTORS\n(Reformatted 1/95) 10/92" }

[ -0.06993688642978668, 0.0251343734562397, -0.08385984599590302, -0.01934342458844185, -0.0222408939152956, 0.020394666120409966, 0.05062726512551308, 0.07799489051103592, 0.038442403078079224, 0.0023157112300395966, 0.04241625592112541, -0.011860734783113003, 0.07557646930217743, 0.0005350079154595733, -0.04449787363409996, -0.014755225740373135, 0.057140693068504333, -0.02865592949092388, -0.05965106561779976, 0.05872892960906029, -0.026636529713869095, 0.03503938764333725, 0.001335797947831452, -0.037059519439935684, -0.04351111873984337, -0.01300055906176567, -0.07070780545473099, -0.11906789243221283, -0.03575563058257103, -0.07737195491790771, 0.15207268297672272, -0.008127566426992416, -0.050898272544145584, 0.004050282761454582, 0.05915118753910065, -0.02585683763027191, 0.07762651890516281, -0.000768429774325341, 0.01432319637387991, 0.017465567216277122, 0.007426785305142403, -0.030474422499537468, -0.07572832703590393, -0.031250979751348495, -0.016529614105820656, 0.05060093477368355, -0.013948755338788033, -0.01622900180518627, -0.0570194348692894, 0.015242718160152435, -0.06987239420413971, -0.08031543344259262, 0.04758455604314804, 0.08004328608512878, -0.047713469713926315, -0.02089414745569229, 0.04959716275334358, 0.03033589757978916, -0.03431575745344162, 0.05447952821850777, -0.05718613043427467, 0.03828674927353859, 0.019308442249894142, -0.010685624554753304, 0.00046623768866993487, 0.04212089627981186, 0.017301835119724274, -0.10507533699274063, 0.012333275750279427, -0.07158277183771133, 0.038145776838064194, -0.005628624465316534, -0.040719494223594666, -0.022617517039179802, -0.05003293603658676, 0.047350384294986725, -0.00911626685410738, 0.0692438930273056, 0.08049952238798141, -0.050064776092767715, 0.039019353687763214, -0.07317221909761429, 0.006521557457745075, -0.021148132160305977, 0.045372720807790756, -0.0016625133575871587, -0.03159739077091217, -0.05542123690247536, 0.06069056689739227, -0.04411022737622261, 0.12444201856851578, -0.0512375682592392, 0.05198654532432556, -0.06783736497163773, 0.022301997989416122, -0.004808272235095501, 0.017782047390937805, 0.022252002730965614, -0.00288426224142313, 0.06840739399194717, 0.01018658559769392, 0.008806318044662476, -0.009313118644058704, -0.05235562101006508, -0.010959433391690254, -0.024121299386024475, 0.05545118823647499, 0.039744846522808075, -0.031788140535354614, 0.02244769223034382, 0.06721547245979309, -0.0007095297914929688, 0.05721626430749893, -0.04377178102731705, 0.11361587047576904, 0.07751172035932541, -0.052872028201818466, 0.09563296288251877, 0.1556001901626587, -0.03980359062552452, 0.007889460772275925, 0.11445999145507812, -0.06483153998851776, 0.06005802005529404, 0.05740758404135704, 0.035991694778203964, -0.09671831876039505, 6.060596508896272e-33, -0.0004954689648002386, 0.049075085669755936, -0.07137182354927063, -0.10986848175525665, -0.056210633367300034, -0.024593332782387733, -0.02312849834561348, 0.04814565181732178, -0.0110482107847929, -0.0015847219619899988, -0.07502918690443039, -0.026130197569727898, 0.02454870007932186, -0.033606212586164474, -0.0003604979137890041, -0.03770826756954193, -0.045075636357069016, 0.024728460237383842, -0.01130190771073103, 0.026345526799559593, 0.07331037521362305, -0.09110077470541, 0.08450867235660553, 0.044308096170425415, -0.06062451750040054, -0.03551037609577179, -0.07149101793766022, -0.04456545040011406, 0.0029495840426534414, -0.03608662262558937, 0.014238571748137474, 0.013391359709203243, 0.09725634008646011, 0.08019896596670151, 0.027654597535729408, 0.043825551867485046, 0.04902161285281181, 0.04492254555225372, -0.04793036729097366, -0.02112184651196003, -0.029814202338457108, 0.11119333654642105, 0.04993210732936859, 0.012403084896504879, -0.011140696704387665, -0.037158336490392685, 0.06683020293712616, 0.012632900848984718, -0.038776695728302, -0.0029298190493136644, -0.033106137067079544, 0.015250704251229763, -0.04904504120349884, 0.030439570546150208, -0.03117498941719532, -0.0024608075618743896, -0.03390937298536301, 0.0253621656447649, 0.08116894960403442, 0.0010932957520708442, 0.02496892586350441, -0.020998820662498474, -0.04932467266917229, -0.008877990767359734, -0.03079001046717167, -0.011724237352609634, 0.015947366133332253, -0.0025785290636122227, 0.046035006642341614, -0.05243006348609924, -0.007759822066873312, 0.06675692647695541, 0.10870787501335144, 0.05834958702325821, -0.013840900734066963, -0.005762376822531223, 0.02942928858101368, -0.014351753517985344, 0.018755825236439705, -0.0071622212417423725, -0.06728552281856537, -0.09318910539150238, -0.047089919447898865, 0.07425852864980698, 0.07278706133365631, -0.06595504283905029, 0.0443560816347599, 0.005039795767515898, -0.07303354889154434, -0.058642175048589706, 0.04568358138203621, -0.04510655254125595, -0.016660476103425026, 0.02263202890753746, 0.07715490460395813, -5.082638473599901e-33, 0.04003717377781868, -0.01612669602036476, -0.06386291235685349, 0.003721392946317792, 0.006421678699553013, -0.022560464218258858, -0.01735627092421055, -0.08065758645534515, -0.033474795520305634, -0.06277453899383545, -0.0679880827665329, -0.06678133457899094, 0.11327183991670609, 0.03688587248325348, -0.043811868876218796, -0.04996839910745621, -0.02122667245566845, 0.028195040300488472, 0.018732108175754547, 0.028616737574338913, -0.001717367093078792, 0.06618048250675201, -0.01876823417842388, 0.07406789064407349, -0.039651744067668915, 0.07475238293409348, 0.017481334507465363, -0.04046756774187088, -0.01990468055009842, 0.024051055312156677, -0.03852566331624985, -0.0851975604891777, -0.03447536751627922, 0.0025495789013803005, -0.09774099290370941, -0.02455342933535576, 0.09493856132030487, -0.03792949765920639, -0.035887375473976135, -0.056725550442934036, 0.023067057132720947, 0.1035815104842186, -0.014966624788939953, 0.07202519476413727, 0.0037051583640277386, -0.026610711589455605, -0.041779980063438416, 0.028396040201187134, 0.08149372786283493, -0.02710179053246975, -0.042603544890880585, -0.042348094284534454, -0.00016937305917963386, -0.0016118035418912768, -0.04345521330833435, -0.023572586476802826, 0.05244854837656021, -0.04268994554877281, -0.11603589355945587, -0.04183105751872063, 0.01750306412577629, 0.06209748238325119, -0.009558734484016895, 0.012898742221295834, 0.0783819705247879, -0.015367759391665459, -0.09057681262493134, -0.015892447903752327, 0.02175111137330532, 0.004231098107993603, -0.03174416720867157, -0.14787331223487854, 0.028501970693469048, -0.05089068412780762, 0.03162294626235962, 0.01473258063197136, 0.01337483897805214, -0.011766920797526836, 0.008710866793990135, 0.018865659832954407, 0.030062543228268623, -0.12110575288534164, -0.0016947948606684804, -0.04242691025137901, 0.0321512334048748, 0.037021659314632416, 0.07066860049962997, -0.059466779232025146, 0.04502987489104271, 0.0366675965487957, -0.057278186082839966, -0.0008868991280905902, 0.05910636857151985, 0.07565554976463318, 0.03126944974064827, -5.291924054517949e-8, 0.026060977950692177, 0.028200224041938782, -0.07283113151788712, 0.08413796126842499, 0.06519114226102829, -0.07298199832439423, 0.01779162324965, 0.008606825955212116, -0.14614973962306976, 0.008103322237730026, 0.023134224116802216, 0.047503769397735596, -0.05691438168287277, -0.007170853670686483, 0.026099976152181625, -0.009943637996912003, 0.0014068123418837786, -0.003684281138703227, -0.023365728557109833, -0.007351953070610762, -0.0362156480550766, -0.023947058245539665, -0.04251417890191078, -0.019536800682544708, -0.003293672576546669, -0.023396067321300507, -0.004087249748408794, 0.04671233892440796, 0.08529067784547806, -0.014190875925123692, -0.04948163777589798, 0.017309822142124176, 0.07053098827600479, -0.025077836588025093, -0.016880782321095467, -0.025421030819416046, -0.06906839460134506, 0.046357590705156326, 0.0005668406956829131, 0.07824297249317169, -0.018910575658082962, 0.020947761833667755, 0.018061036244034767, 0.02927122637629509, 0.030802469700574875, -0.05775219947099686, -0.09544651210308075, -0.04563234746456146, 0.06409135460853577, -0.06297897547483444, 0.026978574693202972, -0.07090902328491211, 0.07530009746551514, 0.0997825339436531, 0.08888126909732819, 0.03882039338350296, 0.011292098090052605, 0.026516791433095932, 0.0019294418161734939, 0.09094221889972687, 0.03778466954827309, -0.04809175059199333, 0.03377784043550491, -0.046225424855947495 ]

{ "pdf_file": "RCW53FS3M3LSRJVG4JZ5PGQ6OGNMMZRP.pdf", "text": "REVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nST\nA\nTEMENT\nOF\nPURPOSE\nRS19552\nThis\nbill\ncreates\nan\nemer\ngency\nsurchar\nge\nto\nbe\npaid\nby\npersons\nwho\ncommit\ncrimes\nand\ninfractions.\nThe\nsurchar\nge\nwould\nenable\nthe\nJudicial\nBranch,\nduring\nthe\ncurrent\nfinancial\ncrisis,\nto\ncontinue\nto\nfulfill\nits\nconstitutional\nresponsibilities\nand\nto\nprovide\nservices\nthat\nbenefit\nthe\npeople\nof\nthe\nState\nof\nIdaho\nand\nhelp\nto\nreduce\nthe\nburden\non\nthe\nstate\nbudget.\nEach\nperson\nwho\nis\nfound\nguilty\nor\npleads\nguilty\nto\na\ncriminal\nof\nfense\nor\ninfraction,\ncommitted\nbetween\nApril\n15,\n2010,\nand\nJune\n30,\n2013,\nwould\npay\na\n$20\nfee\nfor\neach\nof\nfense\nor\ninfraction.\nEighty\npercent\nof\nthe\nfees\ncollected\nwould\nbe\ndeposited\nin\nthe\nDrug\nCourt,\nMental\nHealth\nCourt\nand\nFamily\nCourt\nServices\nFund,\nand\ntwenty\npercent\nwould\nbe\ndeposited\nin\nthe\nIdaho\nStatewide\nT\nrial\nCourt\nAutomated\nRecords\nSystem\n(IST\nARS)\nFund.\nThe\nJudicial\nBranch\nhas\nparticipated\nfully\nin\nthe\nbudget\nholdbacks\nand\nhas\nsearched\nfor\ninnovative\nways\nto\nprovide\ncourt\nservices\nmore\nef\nficiently\n.\nFurther\ncuts\nwould\ngravely\nimpair\nef\nforts\nto\nprovide\nIdaho’\ns\ncitizens\nthe\njustice\nto\nwhich\nthey\nare\nconstitutionally\nentitled,\nand\nto\ncontinue\nsuch\nbeneficial\nprograms\nas\ndrug\ncourts\nand\nmental\nhealth\ncourts.\nT\no\nprevent\nthese\nconsequences,\nthe\nJudicial\nBranch\nproposes\nthe\nadoption\nof\ncourt\ncosts\nthat\nwill\nbe\ndedicated\nto\nthe\nneeds\nof\nthe\ncourts,\nthat\nwill\nbe\npaid\nby\nusers\nof\nthe\ncourts\nwho\nhave\ncommitted\nof\nfenses,\nand\nthat\nwill\nenable\nthe\ncourts\nto\nkeep\ntheir\ndoors\nopen\nand\nto\ncontinue\nto\noperate\nthe\nprograms\nthat\nare\nmore\nnecessary\nthan\never\nduring\nthese\nchallenging\ntimes.\nThe\nemer\ngency\nsurchar\nge\nwill\nprovide\napproximately\nan\nadditional\n$4.1\nmillion\nto\nthe\ndedicated\nfunds,\nrelieving\nthe\npressure\non\ngeneral\nfund\ndollars.\nThe\nfunds\nraised\nthrough\nthe\nemer\ngency\nsurchar\nge\nwill\nbe\nused\nsolely\nto\ncontinue\ncourt\noperations\nand\nto\nfund\nneeded\nservices\nand\nprograms\nas\nprovided\nby\nIdaho\nCode\n§§\n1­1623\nand\n1­1625.\nThis\nbill\nincludes\nan\nemer\ngency\nclause\nthat\nwill\npermit\nthe\napplication\nof\nthe\nemer\ngency\nsurchar\nge\nto\ncrimes\nand\ninfractions\noccurring\non\nor\nafter\nApril\n15,\n2010.\nIt\nalso\nprovides,\nthrough\nwhat\namounts\nto\na\nsunset\nprovision,\nthat\nthe\nemer\ngency\nsurchar\nge\nwill\nnot\napply\nto\nof\nfenses\ncommitted\nafter\nJune\n30,\n2013.\nThis\nwill\npermit\nfurther\nreview\nover\nthe\nnext\nthree\nyears\nof\nthe\nfinancial\noutlook\nand\nthe\nneeds\nof\nthe\nJudicial\nBranch.\nFISCAL\nNOTE\nBased\non\nfigures\nfrom\ncalendar\nyear\n2009\nand\nexpected\ncollection\nrates,\nit\nis\nestimated\nthat\nthe\nemer\ngency\nsurchar\nge\nwill\ngenerate\n$4,121,400\nannually\n.\nOf\nthis\namount,\n$3,297,100\nwill\nbe\ndeposited\nin\nthe\nDrug\nCourt,\nMental\nHealth\nCourt\nand\nFamily\nCourt\nServices\nFund,\nand\n$824,300\nin\nthe\nIST\nARS\nFund.\nContact:\nStatement\nof\nPurpose\n/\nFiscal\nNote\nH\n524\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\n REVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nName:\nPatricia\nT\nobias\nOffice:\nAdministrative\nDirector\nof\nthe\nCourts\nPhone:\n(208)\n334­2246\nStatement\nof\nPurpose\n/\nFiscal\nNote\nH\n524\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\nREVISED\n" }

[ 0.0040326472371816635, -0.025474028661847115, 0.033574122935533524, 0.013002710416913033, 0.05804172903299332, 0.003376629203557968, 0.014579261653125286, -0.06075717881321907, -0.03144167736172676, 0.0050080944783985615, 0.03339175507426262, -0.021320756524801254, 0.04201248660683632, -0.06342700868844986, 0.02573367953300476, 0.05360077694058418, -0.015726905316114426, -0.07020799070596695, -0.006793119013309479, 0.05130566656589508, 0.045378487557172775, 0.01949785090982914, -0.03148949146270752, 0.07017309963703156, 0.09620300680398941, 0.039559029042720795, 0.009704980067908764, -0.0313921794295311, -0.04667793586850166, -0.10983049869537354, -0.06139130890369415, 0.0049125561490654945, -0.07776442170143127, -0.014539461582899094, 0.12342962622642517, -0.03252788260579109, -0.007477445527911186, 0.014390917494893074, 0.0052520111203193665, 0.024154048413038254, -0.014994382858276367, -0.026835115626454353, -0.016917439177632332, 0.005044728983193636, -0.04252730309963226, -0.005368302576243877, -0.055175717920064926, -0.07084215432405472, -0.02819427289068699, 0.014773096889257431, -0.05263329669833183, 0.07795999944210052, 0.028999507427215576, -0.00434583006426692, 0.034067172557115555, -0.07250671833753586, -0.07039903849363327, -0.018510492518544197, 0.012197977863252163, -0.04830658435821533, -0.011319570243358612, -0.02287038415670395, -0.015066687949001789, 0.012188101187348366, 0.0021434822119772434, 0.02774992026388645, -0.11434466391801834, -0.10501454025506973, -0.03829995170235634, -0.04576663300395012, 0.06745797395706177, -0.03253229334950447, 0.06586506962776184, -0.02007855661213398, 0.0063473619520664215, -0.06737640500068665, 0.015682218596339226, 0.13916011154651642, 0.08147837966680527, 0.05274956300854683, -0.008239306509494781, 0.021329551935195923, -0.018012212589383125, -0.02477126196026802, 0.0886179506778717, 0.0065804761834442616, -0.07914560288190842, -0.05850308761000633, -0.012952686287462711, 0.000034622404200490564, -0.020274536684155464, 0.0922410860657692, 0.07365506142377853, -0.022798413410782814, 0.04308982938528061, 0.020835814997553825, -0.041879069060087204, 0.06277018040418625, -0.005706269759684801, 0.11776766926050186, -0.03690703585743904, 0.011592535302042961, -0.04655960947275162, -0.007271735463291407, -0.02207103930413723, 0.011029106564819813, 0.002472205786034465, -0.05966983363032341, 0.08358042687177658, 0.020476436242461205, 0.027352100238204002, -0.019527465105056763, 0.02523212693631649, 0.04606470465660095, -0.0000524107672390528, -0.03968334197998047, 0.019105002284049988, 0.06151195615530014, 0.064560167491436, 0.0009931648382917047, -0.08986640721559525, -0.0783209502696991, -0.0006978496676310897, 0.023993995040655136, -0.009473918005824089, 0.01203685998916626, -0.08700190484523773, 1.4149306482044854e-32, 0.10178130865097046, -0.08159752190113068, -0.01993366703391075, -0.03950114920735359, 0.005370818544179201, -0.01252619456499815, -0.016036685556173325, -0.1535092443227768, -0.02004089765250683, -0.04067908972501755, -0.04837467148900032, -0.03124341554939747, 0.038709670305252075, 0.027204139158129692, -0.057735852897167206, -0.07158177345991135, -0.047332145273685455, -0.01873723790049553, 0.0016426251968368888, -0.01812197081744671, 0.02140478976070881, 0.02101718820631504, -0.06168356537818909, 0.03599502146244049, -0.1017356589436531, 0.028051920235157013, 0.013562289997935295, -0.023772945627570152, -0.04262654483318329, 0.07050003856420517, 0.03522749990224838, -0.08097697049379349, 0.0011771328281611204, 0.07858279347419739, -0.04088028892874718, -0.04692976176738739, -0.019173575565218925, 0.004534693900495768, -0.031200192868709564, -0.0898631364107132, -0.025441545993089676, -0.0006486521451734006, 0.061400413513183594, 0.023954913020133972, -0.04311468079686165, -0.0016643996350467205, 0.12894383072853088, 0.0404718853533268, -0.05520410090684891, 0.052748825401067734, -0.06382942944765091, 0.013559172861278057, 0.03408145532011986, 0.05705319717526436, -0.01312252227216959, -0.052554287016391754, 0.013544433750212193, 0.01209136750549078, 0.01831655204296112, 0.027639273554086685, -0.0646003857254982, 0.04015427827835083, -0.06686066091060638, -0.07189726084470749, -0.07070747017860413, 0.004942100960761309, -0.02120838686823845, 0.014803807251155376, 0.10818175971508026, -0.0743471011519432, 0.08182541280984879, -0.03397943079471588, 0.031388625502586365, 0.014316781423985958, 0.02515282854437828, -0.05979568883776665, 0.12448462098836899, -0.0018618887988850474, -0.033427171409130096, 0.03391391411423683, -0.04054589197039604, -0.06613495200872421, 0.025154877454042435, -0.007375442422926426, 0.022709451615810394, -0.05698130652308464, 0.08834222704172134, -0.03487240523099899, -0.01315175462514162, 0.06103101745247841, 0.03937223553657532, -0.0011205847840756178, 0.039520349353551865, -0.04224328696727753, -0.022279903292655945, -1.2613953637501524e-32, -0.033466897904872894, 0.005938709247857332, 0.04442409425973892, -0.05417795851826668, 0.0005324611556716263, -0.06185532733798027, 0.09905465692281723, -0.1423879712820053, 0.022283777594566345, -0.16496534645557404, 0.03373824059963226, 0.045919328927993774, -0.0020991889759898186, 0.03289703652262688, 0.05021433159708977, 0.04978608340024948, 0.02182180806994438, -0.009039966389536858, 0.01270319428294897, -0.011237853206694126, 0.047622594982385635, 0.07378508895635605, -0.07216449081897736, 0.13226620852947235, -0.06256910413503647, 0.07397089898586273, -0.003934571985155344, 0.02273726835846901, -0.015840204432606697, 0.04651040956377983, -0.061079271137714386, 0.0008770133135840297, -0.0356808602809906, 0.050381384789943695, -0.023875143378973007, -0.013101878575980663, -0.05126769095659256, -0.01328981388360262, -0.07958055287599564, 0.06233205273747444, 0.0860050618648529, -0.014121760614216328, 0.02440907061100006, 0.02663196250796318, -0.04428264498710632, 0.048583194613456726, -0.014802905730903149, 0.019855335354804993, -0.05240596830844879, 0.0027711521834135056, -0.08908793330192566, 0.13302940130233765, -0.07067949324846268, 0.09977993369102478, -0.034884024411439896, -0.044547952711582184, 0.0271883774548769, 0.10432900488376617, 0.020684266462922096, -0.004727542866021395, -0.02876601740717888, 0.017420783638954163, 0.07810429483652115, 0.022133778780698776, 0.0870315283536911, 0.005116757471114397, 0.014867096208035946, -0.04447285830974579, -0.0018751878524199128, 0.061786018311977386, -0.06588446348905563, -0.017789317294955254, -0.007978660985827446, -0.01967739686369896, 0.024609258398413658, -0.02361128106713295, -0.12407024204730988, 0.018785355612635612, -0.042023081332445145, 0.011013148352503777, -0.056940797716379166, -0.006047636270523071, -0.10909910500049591, -0.022977326065301895, 0.03087790682911873, 0.036003295332193375, 0.09448298811912537, -0.035806991159915924, -0.0019744664896279573, 0.057468391954898834, 0.03701360896229744, 0.025038452818989754, 0.020759014412760735, 0.07936780899763107, 0.054909829050302505, -7.048681993637729e-8, 0.05855748429894447, -0.05306236445903778, -0.018163559958338737, 0.014161943458020687, 0.08810445666313171, 0.0163345318287611, -0.0019094491144642234, 0.040087077766656876, -0.011789795011281967, 0.021305952221155167, 0.1454615592956543, 0.04143356904387474, -0.015928855165839195, -0.00590925756841898, 0.06007670611143112, 0.031002691015601158, -0.0010008516255766153, 0.062030695378780365, -0.03506886959075928, -0.07656238228082657, -0.02033993974328041, 0.015326465480029583, -0.031456638127565384, -0.004129332490265369, -0.028233064338564873, 0.03454871103167534, 0.02422076277434826, 0.04197851940989494, 0.012652912177145481, -0.03941728174686432, -0.031071219593286514, 0.04709908738732338, -0.09052550047636032, -0.10415387898683548, -0.023320674896240234, 0.03357264772057533, -0.08320958912372589, -0.030412785708904266, -0.0053452616557478905, 0.06252790242433548, -0.09113261848688126, -0.03609977662563324, -0.010425342246890068, 0.04919406399130821, -0.03539583459496498, 0.024970604106783867, -0.007113095838576555, -0.007992984727025032, 0.05134275183081627, -0.08479751646518707, -0.010428369976580143, -0.02006123960018158, -0.031063934788107872, 0.05717900022864342, -0.00038548241718672216, 0.004177948459982872, -0.0012901994632557034, 0.023006662726402283, 0.002420226577669382, 0.05000336840748787, 0.0341075174510479, -0.01498209685087204, 0.012560440227389336, -0.029419437050819397 ]

{ "pdf_file": "RXIDHLTDVIBR4P4WOFXTJSSV6A3K5GTZ.pdf", "text": "-\nSeptember 18, 2010\nPrecinct AB-12STATE OF HAWAII PRIMARY ELECTION\n READ IN STRUCTI ONS 1 - 2 - 3\n \nSELECT A PARTY\n \nLIBERTARIAN PARTY (L)\nGREEN PARTY (G)\nDEMOCRATIC PARTY (D)\nFREE ENERGY PARTY (F)\nNONPARTISAN BALLOT (N)\nREPUBLICAN PARTY (R)\nUS Senator\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nMALLAN, Lloyd Jeffrey\nUS Representative, Dist 2\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nBROCK, Pat\n \n \nUS Senator\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nBREWER, Jim\nUS Senator\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nINOUYE, Daniel K.\nWOERNER, Andrew D. (Andy)\nUS Representative, Dist 2\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nHIRONO, Mazie\nGovernor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nABERCROMBIE, Neil\nHANNEMANN, Mufi\nREYES, Arturo P. (Art)\nSHIRATORI, Miles\nTANABE, Van K.\nLieutenant Governor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nBERG, Lyla B.\nBUNDA, Robert (Bobby)\nHIRAKAMI, Steve\nHOOSER, Gary L.\nKARAMATSU, Jon Riki\nSAKAMOTO, Norman\nSCHATZ, Brian\nState Senator, Dist 2\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nKOKUBUN, Russell S.\nWAUGH, Timothy (Tim)\nState Representative, Dist 4\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nHANOHANO, Faye P.\nMARZI, Anthony (Tony)Vote Both Sides\nVote Both Sides\nBALLOT STUB10002540100089\n0913031125\nFACSIMILE\nBT: 12: D/P: 4: 2\nSOH/HSTATE OF HAWAII - PRIMARY ELECTION\nSeptember 18, 2010II243CONG SEN REP COUNVOTING INSTRUCTIONS State of Hawaii - Primary Election\n September 18, 2010 F O L D A N D T E A R H E R E BT: 12: D/P: 4: 2 SOH/H\n1Review both sides of this ballot\nbefore voting.\nPlease use a black or blue pen to mark\nyour choices on the ballot. To vote for\nyour choice in each contest, completelyfill in the box to the left of your choice.\nYou must select one political party ballot\nor nonpartisan ballot only.Vote only for candidates of the party you selected.\nVotes for another party’s candidates will not becounted.\nWARNING: If you vote for more candidates/\nchoices than allowed in a contest, your votes for\nthat contest will not be counted.\nRemember to vote for the Special Nonpartisan\noffices.4\n6Correct25\n 98 Incorrect 3 -\nSeptember 18, 2010\nPrecinct AB-12STATE OF HAWAII PRIMARY ELECTION\n READ IN STRUCTI ONS 1 - 2 - 3\nGovernor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nCUNNINGHAM, Daniel H.\nLieutenant Governor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nSPENCE, Deborah (Jo B)\n \n \nUS Senator\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nJARRETT, Jeff\nUS Representative, Dist 2\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nVON SONN, Andrew Vsevolod\nGovernor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nCLAPES, Tony\nMANNER, Paul\nPOLLARD, Thomas (Tom)\nLieutenant Governor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nKAMA, Leonard Leo I\nState Representative, Dist 4\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nSINGER, Solomon\nUS Senator\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nCAVASSO, Cam\nPIRKOWSKI, Eddie\nROCO, John\nUS Representative, Dist 2\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nGIMBERNAT, Antonio\nWHARTON, Ramsay Puanani\nWILLOUGHBY, John W.\nGovernor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nAIONA, Duke\nCARROLL, John S.\nLieutenant Governor\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nFINNEGAN, Lynn Berbano\nKING, Adrienne S.\nState Senator, Dist 2\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nHALE, Michael W.\nMCINTOSH, Lee\nState Representative, Dist 4\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nHAPAI, Marlene (Nachbar)\n \nBOARD OF EDUCATIONSECOND SCHOOL BOARD DISTRICT(HAWAII, MAUI, & KAUAI)\n2nd Departmental School Board Seat (Maui)\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nHART, R. Ray\nROCHA-WILSON, Leona\nWURST, Barry\nCouncilmember, Dist 3\nVote for Not More than One (1)\nYOSHIMOTO, JVote Both Sides\nVote Both Sides10002540200096\n0913031125\nFACSIMILE\nBT: 12: D/P: 4: 2\nSOH/HSTATE OF HAWAII - PRIMARY ELECTION\nSeptember 18, 2010II243CONG SEN REP COUNVOTING INSTRUCTIONS State of Hawaii - Primary Election\n September 18, 2010 F O L D A N D T E A R H E R E BT: 12: D/P: 4: 2 SOH/H\n1Review both sides of this ballot\nbefore voting.\nPlease use a black or blue pen to mark\nyour choices on the ballot. To vote for\nyour choice in each contest, completelyfill in the box to the left of your choice.\nYou must select one political party ballot\nor nonpartisan ballot only.Vote only for candidates of the party you selected.\nVotes for another party’s candidates will not becounted.\nWARNING: If you vote for more candidates/\nchoices than allowed in a contest, your votes for\nthat contest will not be counted.\nRemember to vote for the Special Nonpartisan\noffices.4\n6Correct25\n 98 Incorrect 3" }

[ -0.1316201239824295, -0.03029680624604225, -0.013882601633667946, 0.008287431672215462, 0.04377589374780655, -0.1404113620519638, -0.12197930365800858, -0.0483916699886322, -0.030885037034749985, -0.005745552480220795, -0.054132234305143356, -0.09519350528717041, -0.020554538816213608, 0.014095750637352467, -0.015617528930306435, 0.017643077298998833, 0.024572165682911873, 0.0034816707484424114, -0.04964537173509598, -0.008630266413092613, -0.030551226809620857, 0.038693055510520935, 0.02851063758134842, -0.013197362422943115, -0.0337945856153965, -0.01965302973985672, -0.0929369255900383, -0.013142677024006844, -0.016676491126418114, -0.06513065099716187, 0.05763408914208412, 0.04213970899581909, -0.019248027354478836, -0.006018557585775852, 0.04471420869231224, 0.02137106843292713, 0.030382845550775528, -0.10477771610021591, -0.08505215495824814, -0.013642744161188602, -0.03477199748158455, -0.031103119254112244, -0.005573960021138191, 0.08898353576660156, 0.0036171593237668276, -0.05581265315413475, -0.015907464548945427, -0.1003083810210228, 0.04466930031776428, -0.09331468492746353, -0.046490538865327835, -0.07939599454402924, -0.07393772155046463, -0.03211600333452225, 0.009566892869770527, 0.10536521673202515, 0.0259931068867445, -0.09013909846544266, 0.04320389777421951, -0.035668231546878815, 0.04422973096370697, -0.067502960562706, -0.035918593406677246, 0.031133199110627174, 0.011769313365221024, 0.012867744080722332, 0.0039274911396205425, -0.006499209441244602, 0.004917597863823175, -0.06526695191860199, 0.02414422482252121, 0.0381329283118248, 0.06075827404856682, 0.03883605822920799, 0.009350601583719254, 0.054422300308942795, 0.11835505068302155, 0.054320529103279114, 0.11105675250291824, -0.059238892048597336, 0.046644795686006546, 0.014271749183535576, -0.05448557063937187, 0.025812815874814987, 0.014439277350902557, -0.01961524784564972, 0.0005050976760685444, 0.0932188630104065, 0.03738858178257942, -0.018942425027489662, 0.06307714432477951, 0.029171984642744064, 0.01858878880739212, -0.06585685908794403, -0.034710485488176346, -0.016856273636221886, 0.07599619776010513, -0.01978166215121746, -0.01229159440845251, 0.05110372230410576, 0.0013297833502292633, 0.002679107477888465, 0.04981289803981781, -0.011628346517682076, -0.06199457496404648, 0.0127274040132761, 0.0586826391518116, 0.10018249601125717, 0.01892717555165291, 0.018327703699469566, -0.038490358740091324, 0.053655825555324554, -0.01920083537697792, -0.0422685481607914, -0.06570415198802948, 0.010906949639320374, -0.07389664649963379, -0.023130126297473907, 0.06391340494155884, 0.007477758917957544, -0.06955194473266602, -0.08455070853233337, -0.01118022296577692, 0.06271824985742569, 0.016980048269033432, 0.07648991793394089, -0.04959096387028694, 8.153490364796444e-33, -0.0004593128396663815, 0.0765165463089943, 0.015301347710192204, -0.00047126656863838434, 0.03872499242424965, 0.022151829674839973, 0.007601079065352678, -0.06927461922168732, -0.10038448870182037, -0.031077301129698753, -0.029366934671998024, 0.04344063252210617, -0.05649422109127045, 0.08028801530599594, 0.014378083869814873, -0.11395513266324997, 0.03699027746915817, 0.008798069320619106, -0.0778435692191124, -0.023112155497074127, 0.05906372517347336, -0.00674552982673049, 0.0013465421507135034, -0.011191822588443756, 0.11842885613441467, -0.013205780647695065, -0.06167314574122429, -0.06817928701639175, 0.026850862428545952, 0.041947174817323685, 0.07801312953233719, -0.014558267779648304, -0.08164174109697342, 0.05070609226822853, 0.05921543762087822, -0.025864969938993454, 0.031498219817876816, -0.08613958209753036, 0.0036066349130123854, -0.005516428500413895, -0.030970143154263496, 0.11264048516750336, 0.011043475940823555, -0.050208911299705505, -0.026430532336235046, -0.054491158574819565, 0.06971993297338486, 0.12241595983505249, 0.03909830003976822, 0.03642749786376953, -0.024947604164481163, 0.0038793757557868958, -0.06661190837621689, -0.010671093128621578, 0.09333860874176025, 0.02412714622914791, 0.09701590985059738, -0.05148640647530556, 0.046583473682403564, 0.1242043524980545, -0.005099472589790821, 0.018427886068820953, -0.04375002533197403, 0.011965259909629822, 0.026404736563563347, 0.04051554203033447, -0.048543963581323624, -0.0030126357451081276, 0.014738566242158413, 0.018260255455970764, -0.0060784039087593555, -0.0812043622136116, 0.08727823942899704, -0.03841422125697136, 0.056535039097070694, 0.026416568085551262, 0.014998954720795155, -0.04821234941482544, -0.03319212421774864, -0.009312867186963558, -0.13381485641002655, 0.0477655790746212, 0.003980905283242464, -0.046129945665597916, -0.0007963502430357039, -0.042271021753549576, -0.011263742111623287, 0.056158147752285004, -0.019928954541683197, 0.01957087032496929, 0.006069357972592115, -0.09296286851167679, 0.09158399701118469, -0.031237991526722908, -0.08501686900854111, -6.763486662048321e-33, -0.042387112975120544, -0.03665367141366005, 0.009147663600742817, 0.021772287786006927, 0.043389011174440384, -0.04797077924013138, -0.036305490881204605, -0.0477919727563858, 0.003298162017017603, -0.051013220101594925, 0.01051836833357811, 0.02832156978547573, 0.013592882081866264, -0.07370861619710922, 0.08548580855131149, -0.05106621980667114, -0.0029162412974983454, -0.05644949525594711, 0.01143345981836319, 0.04390615597367287, -0.0018566867802292109, 0.011971604079008102, -0.02283545769751072, -0.003296107752248645, 0.05749163404107094, 0.03961830586194992, 0.0008252050029113889, -0.006276036612689495, -0.002443759236484766, -0.03233828768134117, -0.07643841207027435, 0.02847142331302166, -0.02258266881108284, 0.07197751104831696, 0.019565733149647713, 0.021095849573612213, 0.09004107117652893, -0.007610450033098459, -0.052016593515872955, -0.034953709691762924, 0.020386729389429092, -0.002520038979128003, -0.10268660634756088, -0.03346392512321472, -0.07882767915725708, 0.05802793428301811, -0.09158848971128464, 0.08155357837677002, 0.011583046987652779, 0.02549358829855919, -0.03166339918971062, -0.011173517443239689, -0.00675277691334486, 0.022222204133868217, 0.028299711644649506, 0.030135950073599815, 0.051495883613824844, 0.030380025506019592, 0.01220847386866808, -0.05804590880870819, 0.08867810666561127, -0.023774821311235428, 0.030496353283524513, 0.0077287000603973866, -0.0072888899594545364, 0.02525727078318596, 0.02596866525709629, 0.05127362534403801, -0.05517908185720444, -0.017125481739640236, -0.1004953384399414, 0.005304466001689434, 0.0028281742706894875, -0.02551008202135563, -0.10886097699403763, -0.0029684656765311956, -0.04478280618786812, -0.11531105637550354, 0.0015750841703265905, 0.042337361723184586, -0.0427265428006649, 0.07294577360153198, 0.014454835094511509, -0.007749388460069895, 0.03879284858703613, 0.026967037469148636, 0.060223549604415894, 0.013339624740183353, 0.03664310276508331, -0.016644788905978203, -0.034962255507707596, -0.015000330284237862, -0.005229453556239605, 0.11263789236545563, -0.006219943054020405, -5.641523870281162e-8, 0.012335482984781265, 0.013483980670571327, 0.004129284527152777, -0.006151776760816574, 0.02708793617784977, -0.050231873989105225, 0.040248893201351166, -0.01425557117909193, 0.04271956905722618, 0.07498244941234589, 0.13219189643859863, -0.02121656760573387, 0.02579755336046219, -0.04210206866264343, 0.0598946139216423, 0.02978496439754963, 0.09395510703325272, -0.0087398337200284, -0.04387321695685387, -0.05581185594201088, 0.03900882974267006, 0.06413111835718155, 0.002311720745638013, 0.02861138805747032, 0.02294277399778366, -0.034052178263664246, -0.00868989061564207, 0.11570141464471817, 0.08938112109899521, -0.04860355332493782, -0.05894951522350311, -0.04589429125189781, 0.03527585417032242, 0.038444604724645615, 0.046387482434511185, 0.010523438453674316, -0.014309034682810307, 0.04912221431732178, 0.03039022907614708, 0.03570596128702164, 0.005034101661294699, 0.06349791586399078, -0.0527973510324955, 0.0016266300808638334, 0.0395355150103569, 0.0534670390188694, -0.08100371062755585, -0.02803589217364788, 0.007922315038740635, 0.0563964918255806, -0.0193896796554327, -0.008422979153692722, -0.028465384617447853, 0.02088991552591324, -0.019680080935359, 0.06783466041088104, -0.1001545712351799, 0.003816468408331275, -0.011591790243983269, 0.08639877289533615, 0.003994522616267204, -0.12121950089931488, 0.008539135567843914, -0.009729321114718914 ]

{ "pdf_file": "ECD5ZBDO5DNK52KCE74RPTT5UDFMOIW4.pdf", "text": "ORNL is managed by UT -Battelle \nfor the US Department of Energy \nCORAL Acquisition Update: \nOLCF -4 Project \nBuddy Bland \nOLCF Project Director \n \nPresented to: \nAdvanced Scientific Computing Advisory \nCommittee \nNovember 21, 2014 \nNew Orleans 2 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nOak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility \n(OLCF) \n \nProviding world- leading computational and data resources \nand specialized services for the most computationally \nintensive problems \n \nProviding stable hardware/software path of increasing scale \nto maximize productive applications development \n \nProviding the resources to investigate otherwise inaccessible \nsystems at every scale: from galaxy formation to supernovae to earth systems to automobiles to nanomaterials \n \nWith our partners, deliver transforming discoveries in \nmaterials, biology, climate, energy technologies, and basic \nscience \n \nMission: Deploy and operate the computational \nresources required to tackle global challenges 3 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nCORAL System \nOur Science requires that we continue to \nadvance OLCF’s computational capability over \nthe next decade on the roadmap to Exascale. \nSince clock- rate scaling ended in 2003, \nHPC performance has been achieved \nthrough increased parallelism. Jaguar \nscaled to 300,000 cores. Titan and beyond deliver hierarchical parallelism with very powerful nodes. MPI plus thread level parallelism through \nOpenACC or OpenMP plus vectors \nJaguar: 2.3 PF \nMulti- core CPU \n7 MW Titan: 27 PF \nHybrid GPU/CPU \n9 MW \n2010 2012 2017 2022 OLCF5: 5- 10x Summit \n~20 MW Summit: 5 -10x Titan \nHybrid GPU/CPU 10 MW \n 4 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nToday’s Leadership System - Titan \nHybrid CPU/GPU architecture, Hierarchical Parallelism \nVendors: Cray™ / NVIDIA™ \n•27 PF peak \n•18,688 Compute nodes, each with \n–1.45 TF peak \n–NVIDIA Kepler™ GPU - 1,311 GF \n•6 GB GDDR5 memory \n–AMD Opteron™- 141 GF \n•32 GB DDR3 memory \n–PCIe2 link between GPU and CPU \n•Cray Gemini 3- D Torus Interconnect \n•32 PB / 1 TB/s Lustre® file system \n 5 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nScientific Progress at all Scales \nFusion Energy \nA Princeton Plasma Physics \nLaboratory team led by C.S. Chang \nwas able to simulate and explain nonlinear coherent turbulence \nstructures on the plasma edge in a \nfusion reactor by exploiting \nincreased performance of the Titan architecture. \nTurbomachinery \nRamgen Power Systems is using \nthe Titan system to significantly \nreduce time to solution in the \noptimization of novel designs \nbased on aerospace shock wave \ncompression technology for gas \ncompression systems, such as carbon dioxide compressors. \nNuclear Reactors \nCenter for the Advanced Simulation \nof Lightwater Reactors (CASL ) \ninvestigators successfully performed \nfull core physics power -up simulations \nof the Westinghouse AP1000 \npressurized water reactor core using \ntheir Virtual Environment for Reactor \nApplication code that has been \ndesigned on Titan architecture. Liquid Crystal Film Stability \nORNL Postdoctoral fellow Trung \nNguyen ran unprecedented \nlarge-scale molecular dynamics \nsimulations on Titan to model the \nbeginnings of ruptures in thin \nfilms wetting a solid substrate. \n \nEarthquake Hazard \nAssessment \nTo better prepare California for large \nseismic events SCEC joint \nresearchers have simulated \nearthquakes at high frequencies \nallowing structural engineers to \nconduct realistic physics-based \nprobabilistic seismic hazard analyses. \nClimate Science \nSimulations on OLCF resources \nrecreated the evolution of the climate \nstate during the first half of the last \ndeglaciation period allowing scientists \nto explain the mechanisms that \ntriggered the last period of Southern \nHemisphere warning and deglaciation. \n \n \n 6 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nTwo Architecture Paths for \nToday and Future Leadership Systems \nHybrid Multi -Core (like Titan) \n•CPU / GPU hybrid systems \n•Likely to have multiple CPUs and \nGPUs per node \n•Small number of very powerful nodes \n•Expect data movement issues to be much easier than previous \nsystems – coherent shared \nmemory within a node \n•Multiple levels of memory – on \npackage, DDR, and non- volatile Many Core (like Sequoia/Mira) \n•10’s of thousands of nodes with millions of cores \n•Homogeneous cores \n•Multiple levels of memory – on \npackage, DDR, and non- volatile \n•Unlike prior generations, future \nproducts are likely to be self \nhosted \n \nPower concerns for large supercomputers are driving the largest \nsystems to either Hybrid or Many -core architectures 7 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nWhere do we go from here? \n•Provide the Leadership computing capabilities \nneeded for the DOE Office of Science mission \nfrom 2018 through 2022 \n–Capabilities for INCITE and ALCC science projects \n \n•CORAL was formed by grouping the three Labs \nwho would be acquiring Leadership computers in \nthe same timeframe (2017). \n–Benefits include: \n•Shared technical expertise \n•Decreases risks due to the broader experiences, and broader \nrange of expertise of the collaboration \n•Lower collective cost for developing and responding to RFP 8 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nCORAL Collaboration ORNL, ANL, LLNL) \nApproach \n•Competitive process - one RFP (issued by LLNL) leading to 2 R&D contracts and \n3 computer procurement contracts \n•For risk reduction and to meet a broad set of requirements, 2 architectural paths \nwill be selected and Oak Ridge and Argonne must choose different architectures \n•Once Selected, Multi -year Lab-Awardee relationship to co-design computers \n•Both R&D contracts jointly managed by the 3 Labs \n•Each lab manages and negotiates its own computer procurement contract, and \nmay exercise options to meet their specific needs \n•Understanding that long procurement lead-time may impact architectural \ncharacteristics and designs of procured computers Leadership Computers RFP requests >100 PF, 2 GB/core main memory, local \nNVRAM, and science performance 4x -8x Titan or Sequoia Objective - Procure 3 leadership computers to be \nsited at Argonne, Oak Ridge and Lawrence Livermore \nin 2017. Two of the contracts have been awarded with \nthe Argonne contract in process. Sequoia (LLNL) \n 2012 - 2017 Mira (ANL) 2012 - 2017 Titan (ORNL) 2012 - 2017 Current DOE Leadership Computers \n 9 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nCORAL Evaluation Process \nA buying team consisting of the management, technical, \nand procurement leadership of the three CORAL labs \nmet to select the set of two proposals that provided the \nbest value to the government \nEvaluation Criteria: \n•DOE mission requirements - the best overall combination of solutions \n•Technical proposal excellence; projected performance on the \napplications is the single most important criterion \n•Feasibility of schedule and performance \n•Diversity \n•Overall Price \n•Supplier attributes \n•Risk evaluation 10 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nResults of CORAL Procurement \nRFP Two Diverse Architecture Paths \n NRE contract \n \nOLCF Lab computer contract LLNL computer contract \n \nIBM with \nNVIDIA & Mellanox \nNRE contract \n ALCF computer contract \n \nTo be \nannounced 11 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \n2017 OLCF Leadership System \nHybrid CPU/GPU architecture \nVendor: IBM (Prime) / NVIDIA™ / Mellanox Technologies® \nAt least 5X Titan’s Application Performance \nApproximately 3,400 nodes, each with: \n•Multiple IBM POWER9 CPUs and multiple NVIDIA Tesla® GPUs \nusing the NVIDIA Volta™ architecture \n•CPUs and GPUs completely connected with high speed NVLink ™ \n•Large coherent memory: over 512 GB (HBM + DDR4) \n–all directly addressable from the CPUs and GPUs \n•An additional 800 GB of NVRAM, which can be configured as either a \nburst buffer or as extended memory \n•over 40 TF peak performance \nDual -rail Mellanox® EDR -IB full, non -blocking fat -tree interconnect \nIBM Elastic Storage ( GPFS™) - 1TB/s I/O and 120 PB disk capacity . \n \n 12 INTRODUCING NVLINK AND STACKED MEMORY \nTRANSFORMATIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR 2016 WITH POWER 8+ ®, AND BEYOND \nNVLINK \nGPU high speed interconnect \n5X-12X PCI -E Gen3 Bandwidth \nPlanned support for POWER® CPUs \nStacked (HBM) Memory \n4x Higher Bandwidth (~1 TB/s) \n3x Larger Capacity \n4x More Energy Efficient per bit \nSlide courtesy of NVIDIA 13 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nSummit’s High-Speed Interconnect \nMellanox Technologies® Dual -Rail EDR Infiniband \nInfiniBand Interconnect \n•3-Level Fat Tree \n•23 GB/s (dual plane \n100Gb/s) \n•5 hops max \n•Adaptive routing \n Three- level Fat Tree Interconnect \n \nIB Top of Rack switches IB core switches IB core switches \nDual 100 Gb/s links 14 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nSummit Key Software Components \n•System \n–Linux® \n–IBM Elastic Storage (GPFS™) \n–IBM Platform Computing™ (LSF) \n–IBM Platform Cluster Manager™ (xCAT ) \n•Programming Environment \n–Compilers supporting OpenMP and OpenACC \n•IBM XL, PGI, LLVM, GNU, NVIDIA \n–Libraries \n•IBM Engineering and Scientific Subroutine Library (ESSL) \n•FFTW, ScaLAPACK , PETSc , Trilinos , BLAS -1,-2,-3, NVBLAS \n•cuFFT , cuSPARSE, cuRAND, NPP, Thrust \n–Debugging \n•Allinea DDT, IBM Parallel Environment Runtime Edition ( pdb) \n•Cuda- gdb, Cuda- memcheck , valgrind, memcheck , helgrind, stacktrace \n–Profiling \n•IBM Parallel Environment Developer Edition (HPC Toolkit) \n•VAMPIR, Tau, Open|Speedshop, nvprof, gprof, Rice HPCToolkit 15 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nHow does Summit compare to Titan \nFeature Summit Titan \nApplication Performance 5-10x Titan Baseline \nNumber of Nodes ~3,400 18,688 \nNode performance > 40 TF 1.4 TF \nMemory per Node >512 GB (HBM + DDR4) 38GB (GDDR5+DDR3) \nNVRAM per Node 800 GB 0 \nNode Interconnect NVLink (5-12x PCIe 3) PCIe 2 \nSystem Interconnect \n(node injection bandwidth) Dual Rail EDR-IB (23 GB/s) Gemini (6.4 GB/s) \nInterconnect Topology Non-blocking Fat Tree 3D Torus \nProcessors IBM POWER9 \nNVIDIA Volta™ AMD Opteron™ \nNVIDIA Kepler™ \nFile System 120 PB, 1 TB/s, GPFS™ 32 PB, 1 TB/s, Lustre® \nPeak power consumption 10 MW 9 MW 16 ASCAC11/2014 - Bland \nQuestions? AS@ornl.gov \nThis research used resources of the Oak Ridge Leadership \nComputing Facility, which is a DOE Office of Science User Facility \nsupported under Contract DE -AC05- 00OR22725 \nGPU Hackathon October 2014 \n" }

[ -0.15853510797023773, 0.0760892704129219, 0.06107170134782791, 0.05920913815498352, 0.046974748373031616, 0.015247293747961521, -0.0036137020215392113, 0.04735906794667244, -0.05668839067220688, -0.02331186644732952, 0.09569211304187775, -0.030339686200022697, 0.00873943418264389, -0.006773761007934809, -0.0720355436205864, -0.009579189121723175, -0.009064489975571632, -0.03654453158378601, -0.05096202343702316, 0.01478875707834959, 0.056286782026290894, 0.014704877510666847, -0.01918969303369522, -0.04198051616549492, -0.01140949409455061, 0.059697844088077545, -0.06970278173685074, 0.009241375140845776, -0.03821472078561783, -0.04707465320825577, -0.051576051861047745, 0.09190019965171814, -0.03694096952676773, 0.019962601363658905, 0.08364792913198471, 0.023763317614793777, -0.005820641294121742, -0.04010922089219093, -0.022563757374882698, 0.008455725386738777, -0.057886380702257156, -0.05428905785083771, 0.06709828227758408, -0.02762032300233841, 0.07419463247060776, -0.0009336746879853308, 0.03491423651576042, -0.07231973111629486, -0.07268872857093811, 0.06226189061999321, -0.09045932441949844, -0.0032567682210355997, 0.07599814981222153, 0.08499201387166977, 0.025338858366012573, -0.01896951161324978, 0.06615898758172989, -0.04440174624323845, -0.027592213824391365, 0.027353323996067047, -0.010667775757610798, -0.009371367283165455, -0.04260457307100296, -0.05715459585189819, 0.0028498859610408545, 0.026782291010022163, -0.008605307899415493, -0.03298099711537361, -0.01895453967154026, -0.032186683267354965, 0.05311192572116852, -0.06324821710586548, -0.06642194092273712, 0.07357925921678543, -0.00004368762893136591, 0.06458237022161484, 0.052423831075429916, 0.0267676692456007, 0.061185386031866074, -0.16031047701835632, -0.012937822379171848, -0.031591519713401794, 0.0005254087154753506, -0.07282628118991852, -0.04661174863576889, 0.015011248178780079, -0.11134917289018631, -0.009461663663387299, 0.0402560755610466, 0.07664847373962402, 0.07354170083999634, -0.03834560886025429, -0.05024297162890434, 0.09306986629962921, 0.054348476231098175, -0.0553104430437088, -0.056999754160642624, 0.048775654286146164, 0.04142246022820473, 0.0629434734582901, 0.02867954410612583, 0.039894573390483856, -0.05181388929486275, 0.03352091461420059, -0.05799860134720802, 0.011658384464681149, -0.00955719593912363, 0.07987145334482193, -0.06994753330945969, -0.029736723750829697, 0.033172644674777985, 0.03670757636427879, -0.03616586700081825, -0.045078400522470474, 0.01881096325814724, -0.010585751384496689, 0.027789156883955002, 0.03505610302090645, 0.023989355191588402, -0.04570567607879639, 0.06900458037853241, 0.034351371228694916, -0.06681456416845322, -0.0362095944583416, -0.049153272062540054, -0.04413512349128723, -0.017941772937774658, 5.8852770366008975e-33, -0.05537619814276695, -0.04925474151968956, 0.030573958531022072, 0.002385885687544942, -0.04966287314891815, 0.0006709996378049254, -0.016403010115027428, 0.011966726742684841, -0.03643088787794113, -0.0053581977263092995, -0.06995303928852081, 0.02498289756476879, 0.008485945872962475, -0.06536780297756195, -0.007879284210503101, -0.11487303674221039, 0.05655708536505699, -0.06310504674911499, 0.07025512307882309, -0.042843203991651535, 0.045994020998477936, -0.10818687081336975, 0.013625683262944221, 0.0105453385040164, 0.05874161794781685, 0.0010330637451261282, 0.023227274417877197, -0.06896039098501205, -0.09772079437971115, 0.04299606755375862, 0.04806214198470116, 0.05718418210744858, -0.0028054569847881794, 0.017154743894934654, 0.04324221611022949, 0.0017319810576736927, -0.00512708630412817, -0.026618877425789833, -0.02369709499180317, -0.016325756907463074, 0.03642682358622551, 0.017981031909585, -0.012973756529390812, 0.03374965488910675, -0.0012026733020320535, -0.01750136911869049, -0.054204028099775314, 0.06766637414693832, 0.04109262302517891, -0.01097968127578497, 0.028503861278295517, 0.041871704161167145, 0.030168041586875916, 0.005886342376470566, 0.034820545464754105, 0.11140825599431992, 0.0173755194991827, 0.012966963462531567, 0.01271683070808649, 0.0933346375823021, 0.034804124385118484, 0.06837467849254608, -0.0570366345345974, 0.02761150896549225, -0.033074215054512024, 0.011755223385989666, -0.015790892764925957, -0.022046661004424095, -0.08196103572845459, -0.03384736180305481, -0.055468179285526276, -0.011031430214643478, 0.06998284161090851, 0.07939828187227249, -0.08761336654424667, -0.04877849295735359, -0.023019444197416306, 0.08911830186843872, 0.05328238755464554, -0.06497623771429062, -0.046705398708581924, 0.01776212453842163, 0.00822516344487667, -0.07345236837863922, -0.04680948704481125, 0.035685643553733826, -0.007956795394420624, -0.03563242405653, 0.037215620279312134, -0.02561487816274166, 0.02749948389828205, 0.022126207128167152, -0.07065604627132416, 0.09039771556854248, 0.019407987594604492, -7.502284861540128e-33, 0.021837741136550903, -0.009596739895641804, -0.04026238992810249, -0.01588999107480049, -0.0558960922062397, -0.03131904825568199, 0.027160080149769783, -0.03322400152683258, 0.07589740306138992, 0.03132801875472069, 0.012766418978571892, -0.01783658191561699, -0.028296636417508125, -0.04942990839481354, 0.02921135723590851, 0.024778511375188828, -0.09554307907819748, -0.011427992023527622, -0.014391440898180008, 0.062261663377285004, 0.05367308109998703, 0.07454723864793777, -0.07391692698001862, 0.007657893467694521, -0.08191569894552231, -0.004775139968842268, -0.027376482263207436, 0.01571648381650448, 0.011868404224514961, 0.03626694902777672, 0.03310086578130722, -0.1052413210272789, -0.06537916511297226, 0.02924659475684166, -0.017126254737377167, -0.09354450553655624, 0.12723715603351593, -0.023282062262296677, 0.039856452494859695, -0.014465735293924809, 0.04695061966776848, 0.07467536628246307, -0.05767009034752846, 0.03222990781068802, -0.06057165190577507, 0.06889498978853226, -0.00819847546517849, -0.02729274146258831, 0.04135286435484886, -0.04094269499182701, 0.0047379108145833015, -0.006255742162466049, 0.09770288318395615, 0.016484051942825317, -0.041641972959041595, 0.02060060016810894, 0.016437731683254242, -0.05275295674800873, -0.07550623267889023, 0.027091825380921364, 0.11126742511987686, 0.031491123139858246, 0.029236668720841408, -0.061506666243076324, 0.10535349696874619, -0.03424371778964996, 0.016948934644460678, 0.008403562940657139, 0.06692378968000412, -0.10449012368917465, 0.034333426505327225, -0.00027869382756762207, -0.050280872732400894, -0.08147280663251877, 0.022666215896606445, -0.0406825877726078, 0.004575501196086407, -0.013902542181313038, -0.06841504573822021, 0.044443827122449875, 0.03526786342263222, 0.035192228853702545, -0.04237687215209007, 0.10173457115888596, 0.031813640147447586, -0.05666273087263107, 0.036212969571352005, 0.07911526411771774, 0.02202114276587963, -0.06938853859901428, -0.0453377328813076, -0.09688763320446014, -0.0021657391916960478, 0.07096391171216965, -0.01982206664979458, -6.411523401084196e-8, -0.0405021533370018, -0.04201227053999901, -0.012103348039090633, 0.0071283066645264626, 0.05862095579504967, -0.028671829029917717, 0.00821156520396471, -0.02917403168976307, 0.01803436689078808, -0.10995279997587204, -0.021765539422631264, 0.04034923389554024, -0.08923329412937164, -0.09023560583591461, -0.03476274386048317, -0.06856393069028854, -0.08311837911605835, 0.07078107446432114, -0.01794813573360443, -0.020970990881323814, 0.0791618674993515, -0.028706155717372894, 0.039179522544145584, 0.009377744048833847, -0.05481113865971565, 0.00421117665246129, 0.027134757488965988, 0.015469714999198914, 0.012628084048628807, 0.013892168179154396, -0.10418854653835297, 0.0069868373684585094, 0.0539274625480175, -0.024651935324072838, -0.02763485349714756, 0.036441393196582794, 0.031186409294605255, -0.016235997900366783, 0.0384855680167675, 0.0022986128460615873, -0.046908557415008545, 0.009125055745244026, 0.011619879864156246, 0.05162601172924042, 0.05112133547663689, 0.02587396837770939, -0.117222361266613, -0.030358614400029182, 0.032981857657432556, -0.017778972163796425, 0.010843874886631966, 0.017452845349907875, 0.04322035610675812, 0.07257811725139618, -0.062107011675834656, 0.12988433241844177, 0.014371730387210846, -0.026169469580054283, -0.042058687657117844, 0.02344507910311222, 0.11266060173511505, -0.10738764703273773, 0.039744939655065536, 0.030584068968892097 ]

{ "pdf_file": "4VMUKG4TIVAVUP5H4SRGXIJZUWERU7I2.pdf", "text": "MESSAGE NO: MESSAGE DATE: \n MESSAGE STATUS: CATEGORY: \nTYPE: PUBLIC NON-PUBLIC \nS U B - T Y P E : FR CITE: FR CITE DATE: \nREFERENCE \nMESSAGE # (s): \nCASE #(s): \n \nEFFECTIVE DATE: COURT CASE #: PERIOD OF REVIEW: TO \nPERIOD COVERED: TO \n \n3305302\n07/01/2012\n10/31/2013\n✔\nINI-Initiation of Review\nA-428-842\nActive\n78 FR 65283\n11/01/2013\nAntidumping\n06/30/2013\n10/31/2013\nMessage Date: 11/01/2013 Message Number: 3305302 Page 1 of 3 Notice of Lifting of Suspension Date:\n \n \nTO: { Directors Of Field Operations, Port Directors }\n \nFROM: { Director AD/CVD & Revenue Policy & Programs }\n \nRE: Initiation of antidumping duty investigation of Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel from\nGermany (A-428-842)\n \n1. On 10/31/2013, Commerce published in the Federal Register its initiation of the antidumping\nduty investigation of Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel from Germany (78 FR 65283).\n \n2. The scope of this investigation covers grain-oriented silicon electrical steel (GOES). GOES is a\nflat-rolled alloy steel product containing by weight at least 0.6 percent but not more than 6 percent\nof silicon, not more than 0.08 percent of carbon, not more than 1.0 percent of aluminum, and no\nother element in an amount that would give the steel the characteristics of another alloy steel, in\ncoils or in straight lengths. The GOES that is subject to this investigation is currently classifiable\nunder subheadings 7225.11.0000, 7226.11.1000, 7226.11.9030, and 7226.11.9060 of the\nHarmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are\nprovided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this\ninvestigation is dispositive.\n \n3. This investigation has been assigned investigation number A-428-842.\n \n4. If there are any questions by the importing public regarding this message, please contact the\nCall Center for the Office of AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade\nAdministration, U.S. Department of Commerce at (202) 482-0984. CBP ports should submit their\ninquiries through authorized CBP channels only. (This message was generated by O2:SB.)\n \n5. There are no restrictions on the release of this information.\n \nMichael B. Walsh\nMessage Date: 11/01/2013 Message Number: 3305302 Page 2 of 3 Company Details\n \n*Party Indicator Value:\nI = Importer, M = Manufacturer, E = Exporter, S = Sold To Party\nMessage Date: 11/01/2013 Message Number: 3305302 Page 3 of 3" }

[ 0.007456778082996607, 0.021837027743458748, 0.02459232322871685, 0.0636110007762909, 0.012015962041914463, 0.09486804902553558, -0.09642843902111053, 0.07626114040613174, -0.046530865132808685, -0.011592577211558819, 0.023392733186483383, 0.023612236604094505, -0.025397872552275658, -0.0013452598359435797, -0.0757363811135292, 0.04036540538072586, 0.10993896424770355, 0.023427875712513924, -0.07376445829868317, -0.017678964883089066, 0.10688894987106323, 0.020561685785651207, 0.01741708628833294, 0.003790325950831175, -0.00949167925864458, 0.0919685885310173, 0.04497024416923523, -0.056426770985126495, -0.027881518006324768, 0.022243928164243698, 0.003715264145284891, -0.06635718792676926, 0.023844236508011818, 0.010167810134589672, 0.025014810264110565, 0.037461668252944946, 0.08140340447425842, 0.09194830060005188, 0.060155633836984634, 0.03140011802315712, -0.1031099408864975, -0.02394115924835205, 0.008385653607547283, -0.019403474405407906, -0.0366603247821331, -0.07473938912153244, -0.07577458769083023, -0.03550586476922035, -0.04064829647541046, -0.0102910865098238, -0.09531120955944061, -0.02328803762793541, 0.04169309511780739, 0.013587676919996738, -0.010528026148676872, 0.02932768687605858, -0.016409091651439667, -0.04066633805632591, -0.05134870111942291, 0.01594562828540802, -0.062371876090765, -0.02721460536122322, 0.00009458765998715535, -0.01295766606926918, 0.051113929599523544, -0.021800333634018898, -0.07175897061824799, -0.016731729730963707, -0.006004501599818468, -0.06701450794935226, -0.006106528453528881, 0.047184012830257416, -0.015217557549476624, 0.014699866995215416, -0.001663074130192399, 0.04681914299726486, -0.027634622529149055, 0.09516935795545578, 0.10299213230609894, -0.08557398617267609, 0.018127599731087685, -0.003709306474775076, -0.007437435910105705, -0.009961782954633236, 0.07943113893270493, 0.06294899433851242, -0.04647193104028702, 0.018167005851864815, -0.024300646036863327, -0.0014200606383383274, 0.02570437081158161, -0.01925622671842575, -0.009534407407045364, -0.02944064512848854, 0.05421784520149231, 0.04280848428606987, -0.03856484964489937, -0.11336791515350342, 0.045894231647253036, 0.0030562300235033035, -0.022049345076084137, 0.05636521428823471, -0.04304756969213486, 0.0027660324703902006, -0.015591379255056381, -0.07989822328090668, 0.04040631651878357, -0.040147118270397186, -0.061035871505737305, 0.0015869869384914637, 0.058860890567302704, -0.04238056764006615, -0.016604961827397346, 0.03313848003745079, 0.007648498751223087, -0.04824891313910484, -0.027913542464375496, 0.05364321917295456, 0.013966972939670086, -0.00904220063239336, -0.023550596088171005, 0.05349227041006088, 0.0443158857524395, -0.02722395397722721, -0.038679540157318115, -0.04693685472011566, -0.08951565623283386, 3.6141077074550175e-33, 0.024288497865200043, -0.038619112223386765, -0.026417342945933342, -0.035938650369644165, -0.09178317338228226, -0.08175811916589737, 0.011885322630405426, -0.06444505602121353, 0.02475711703300476, -0.002954895840957761, -0.00017498174565844238, 0.009081486612558365, 0.05143271014094353, 0.03326151520013809, 0.04840560257434845, -0.0195451769977808, -0.015525012277066708, 0.0025659799575805664, -0.020838769152760506, 0.058394450694322586, 0.017415016889572144, -0.040192071348428726, 0.011994468048214912, -0.0039108735509216785, -0.025854501873254776, 0.04408489540219307, 0.0097541818395257, 0.08523266017436981, -0.07590003311634064, -0.010877485387027264, 0.04275738075375557, 0.03038458339869976, -0.10922485589981079, 0.010388602502644062, 0.07316281646490097, -0.04581756144762039, 0.05515678972005844, -0.0031663679983466864, 0.03054572455585003, -0.01396257895976305, -0.007503070402890444, -0.009660418145358562, 0.011986245401203632, 0.027841493487358093, 0.03355859965085983, 0.03371283784508705, 0.02322312258183956, 0.002567739225924015, 0.08896947652101517, 0.02315663918852806, -0.03320836275815964, 0.03872207924723625, -0.07817206531763077, -0.13191363215446472, -0.03408264368772507, -0.003928799647837877, 0.02598104067146778, 0.012436110526323318, 0.06250978261232376, 0.03376026451587677, -0.0667654499411583, 0.017982197925448418, -0.039350997656583786, -0.07005603611469269, -0.06052001938223839, -0.035182248800992966, 0.014674441888928413, 0.00970847625285387, 0.09309427440166473, -0.016487978398799896, 0.0054549542255699635, 0.011589509434998035, 0.01878415234386921, 0.032474763691425323, 0.032468803226947784, -0.08610821515321732, 0.07269053906202316, 0.03240380808711052, -0.010661313310265541, -0.018510572612285614, -0.012223361991345882, -0.00017512065824121237, -0.0598364919424057, -0.0755588561296463, 0.07452959567308426, -0.02064688131213188, 0.00015171106497291476, 0.004550275392830372, -0.07194239646196365, -0.004610586445778608, 0.012619527988135815, 0.020028792321681976, -0.15676318109035492, 0.11144028604030609, -0.026779718697071075, -5.717401382282105e-33, 0.004404265433549881, 0.019388316199183464, -0.02200618013739586, 0.008824099786579609, 0.008594040758907795, -0.007290514186024666, -0.0076021719723939896, -0.06343191862106323, 0.02120359241962433, -0.0702214315533638, -0.057129401713609695, 0.004028081428259611, 0.04863325133919716, 0.019587496295571327, -0.0767398402094841, 0.013291914016008377, -0.06250488013029099, 0.03202996775507927, -0.0046953363344073296, -0.03752303496003151, 0.05844244733452797, 0.09895830601453781, -0.07853025943040848, 0.04196750372648239, -0.06051814556121826, -0.0277298204600811, -0.01743471622467041, -0.02008810266852379, -0.06734979897737503, -0.007121038157492876, 0.11930428445339203, -0.1526087522506714, -0.053632643073797226, 0.07919025421142578, -0.04690064862370491, -0.08217116445302963, 0.05548013374209404, -0.09517738223075867, -0.09778985381126404, 0.04093145206570625, 0.04543762281537056, 0.019139934331178665, -0.02735651656985283, 0.06500113755464554, 0.012309619225561619, 0.12217943370342255, 0.02292289398610592, -0.004310667980462313, -0.031037187203764915, -0.012145623564720154, 0.0028293065261095762, 0.010887757875025272, -0.02563006617128849, 0.04205663874745369, 0.07090307772159576, 0.0029425115790218115, 0.03919506072998047, -0.043355997651815414, -0.08895350247621536, 0.06298792362213135, 0.04348725453019142, -0.0019494695588946342, -0.03927481174468994, 0.04784872755408287, 0.06562341004610062, -0.0059442222118377686, -0.026784993708133698, -0.097707100212574, 0.048622697591781616, 0.03657595440745354, 0.023261308670043945, 0.009486760012805462, 0.018514901399612427, -0.07351240515708923, -0.01227332092821598, -0.03276900202035904, 0.01255452074110508, 0.029439276084303856, -0.0737958550453186, 0.12597714364528656, -0.03873036801815033, -0.013634907081723213, -0.039797767996788025, -0.022806033492088318, 0.02266659028828144, 0.05018080770969391, 0.09300798177719116, -0.03356493264436722, -0.04735565185546875, 0.04042226821184158, -0.0010483588557690382, 0.09663721174001694, -0.09240768849849701, 0.022648951038718224, 0.06324008107185364, -5.529266999815263e-8, 0.08392544090747833, -0.01783684641122818, -0.006169105414301157, 0.019870223477482796, 0.09363805502653122, -0.013997022062540054, -0.06397167593240738, -0.05831538140773773, -0.03682249039411545, 0.03607456386089325, 0.0582406222820282, -0.03274744004011154, -0.1346326768398285, -0.03685459494590759, 0.05140567943453789, -0.05370878055691719, 0.0038077414501458406, 0.09027592092752457, -0.010087449103593826, 0.014691640622913837, 0.01906200312077999, 0.027463793754577637, -0.0222646351903677, -0.024372337386012077, -0.004832285922020674, -0.011615230701863766, 0.044154804199934006, -0.009638425894081593, -0.016937758773565292, 0.027833031490445137, 0.029502496123313904, 0.007956051267683506, 0.07737427949905396, -0.08610953390598297, 0.004530439153313637, -0.08428339660167694, -0.06549198925495148, 0.03437767177820206, 0.14084579050540924, 0.05008914694190025, 0.0118018863722682, -0.00952569954097271, 0.054021213203668594, 0.06330961734056473, 0.024200057610869408, 0.07530190795660019, -0.10025519132614136, -0.02420995384454727, 0.036696743220090866, -0.00936689879745245, -0.026494676247239113, -0.1080489531159401, 0.004567312076687813, -0.011702315881848335, 0.019084881991147995, 0.06844630837440491, -0.016096623614430428, -0.04813508316874504, -0.0744917094707489, -0.04790807142853737, 0.1150301992893219, 0.02417120710015297, -0.025638796389102936, 0.09260750561952591 ]

{ "pdf_file": "QRJ42GGGA52M42R57XTGIQONYKAKWVG5.pdf", "text": "page 1 of 7 Thu Jan 06 08:22:13 EST 2011 170801040000  New York State Education Department\nSpecial Education\nSchool District Data Profile for\nMayfield Central School District for 2008-09\n  Strategic Evaluation, Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting (SEDCAR)\nSpecial Education School District Data Profile for 2008-09\nThe Special Education School District Data Profile is prepared in accordance with the requirement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Each State must have \na State Performance Plan (SPP) to evaluate the State's efforts to meet the requirements and purposes of the implementation of IDEA. The SPP is a six-year plan which describes \nNew York State's performance on 20 indicators. States must report annually to the public on the performance of the State in an Annual Performance Report (APR) and each \nschool district against the State's targets. New York State's SPP and the APR that describe these indicators in detail are available at \nhttp://www.vesid.nysed.gov/specialed/spp/home.html .\nThe following report reflects only quantifiable data collected by the State. Since performance of a school district in any indicator may be the result of unique circumstances within \na district, readers are encouraged to consider information provided by the district's administration in interpreting these data.\nEnrollment and Classification Rate\n  2008-09\nEnrollment of school-age students with disabilities on October 1 157\nDistrict enrollment (public and nonpublic school-age students ? with and without disabilities) on the first Wednesday \nin October1,020\nSpecial education classification rate 15.4%\nEnrollment of preschool students with disabilities on October 1 12\nIndicator 1: Graduation Rate of Students with Disabilities\n 2008-09\n(2005 Total Cohort four years later as \nof August 2009)2008-09\n(2004 Total Cohort five years later as \nof June 2009)\nNumber of students with disabilities who first entered 9th grade anywhere (or \nif ungraded, became 17 years old) in 2005-0613  \nNumber of students with disabilities who first entered 9th grade anywhere (or \nif ungraded, became 17 years old) in 2004-05  10\nGraduation rate 53.8% 80%\nState target for 2008-09 44% or higher No State Target\nMeets State target? Not Applicable* Not Applicable\n* Districts are only held accountable for the performance of students when there are at least 30 students in the total cohort. page 2 of 7 Thu Jan 06 08:22:13 EST 2011 170801040000  New York State Education Department\nSpecial Education\nSchool District Data Profile for\nMayfield Central School District for 2008-09\n  Strategic Evaluation, Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting (SEDCAR)\nIndicator 2: Drop-Out Rate of Students with Disabilities\n 2008-09\n(2005 Total Cohort as of August 2009)\nNumber of students with disabilities who first entered 9th grade anywhere (or if ungraded, became 17 years old) in \n2005-06 school year13\nDrop-out rate after four years 7.7%\nState target for 2008-09 18% or lower\nMeets State target? Not Applicable*\n* Districts are only held accountable for the performance of students when there are at least 30 students in the total cohort.\nIndicator 3: State Assessments\nParticipation in State Assessments2008-09\nGrades\n3-8\nEnglish Language \nArts (ELA)Grades\n3-8\nMathHigh School\nEnglish Language \nArts (ELA)High School\nMath\nEnrollment of students with disabilities for participation rate 83 83 Less Than 40* Less Than 40*\nParticipation rate 99% 100% * *\nState target for 2008-09 95% 95% 95% 95%\nMeets State target? Yes Yes * *\n* Participation rate is provided only if at least 40 students with disabilities are reported in the first row.\nPerformance on State Assessments and Adequate Yearly Progress \n(AYP)2008-09\nGrades\n3-8\nEnglish Language \nArts (ELA)Grades\n3-8\nMathHigh School\nEnglish Language \nArts (ELA)High School\nMath\nEnrollment of students with disabilities for performance \naccountability81 81 Less Than 30** Less Than 30**\nScore on performance index 126 132 ** **\nState target for 2008-09 106 115 129 139\nMeets State target? Yes Yes ** **\nMade AYP? Yes Yes ** **\n** A performance index score is provided only if at least 30 students with disabilities are reported in the first row. page 3 of 7 Thu Jan 06 08:22:13 EST 2011 170801040000  New York State Education Department\nSpecial Education\nSchool District Data Profile for\nMayfield Central School District for 2008-09\n  Strategic Evaluation, Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting (SEDCAR)\nIndicator 4: Suspensions/Expulsions\nLong-term Suspension Rate 2008-09\nNumber of students with disabilities suspended out-of-school for more than 10 days 0\nNumber of students with disabilities enrolled on October 1 157\nPercent of students with disabilities suspended out-of-school for more than 10 days 0%\nState target for 2008-09 2.7% or lower\nMeets State target? Yes\nIndicator 5: School-age Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)\n  2008-09\nNumber of students with disabilities ages \n6-21 on October 1150\n Percent of students with disabilities in general \neducation program for:In\nseparate\nschools / facilitiesIn\nOther\nSettings80% or\nmore of\nthe day40 to 79%\nof the dayLess than\n40% of\nthe day\nPercent of students ages 6-21 in each setting 30.7% 50% 18% 1.3% 0%\nState target for 2008-09 More than 53.2% No State Target Less than 24.5% Less than 6.7% No State Target\nMeets State target? NoNot Applicable Yes Yes Not Applicable\nIndicator 6: Preschool Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)\nThe data for this indicator are not presented because the LRE reporting categories for preschool children with disabilities are under review by the United States Department of \nEducation. page 4 of 7 Thu Jan 06 08:22:13 EST 2011 170801040000  New York State Education Department\nSpecial Education\nSchool District Data Profile for\nMayfield Central School District for 2008-09\n  Strategic Evaluation, Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting (SEDCAR)\nIndicator 7: Preschool Outcomes\nIf data are not provided for this indicator, see the schedule posted at http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/sedcar/sppschedule.html for the school year in which this school district will \nreport data for this indicator.\n 2008-09\nPositive\nSocial - Emotional SkillsAcquisition and Use of \nKnowledge & SkillsUse of\nAppropriate Behaviors\nto Meet\ntheir Needs\nNumber of preschool students with disabilities evaluated for progress between \nentry into preschool education and exit from preschool special education.\nOf those preschool children who entered the preschool program below age \nexpectations, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the \ntime they exited the program.\nState target for 2008-09 Targets Begin in 2009-10 Targets Begin in 2009-10 Targets Begin in 2009-10\nMeets State target?\nThe percent of preschool children who were functioning within age expectations \nby the time they exited the program.\nState target for 2008-09 Targets Begin in 2009-10 Targets Begin in 2009-10 Targets Begin in 2009-10\nMeets State target?\nIndicator 8: Parental Involvement\nIf data are not provided for this indicator, see the schedule posted at http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/sedcar/sppschedule.html for the school year in which this school district will \nreport data for this indicator.\n  2008-09\nNumber of completed parent surveys returned 69\nPercent of parents who reported that schools facilitated parent involvement to improve services and results for \nstudents with disabilities95.7%\nState target for 2008-09 88% or higher\nMeets State target? Yes page 5 of 7 Thu Jan 06 08:22:13 EST 2011 170801040000  New York State Education Department\nSpecial Education\nSchool District Data Profile for\nMayfield Central School District for 2008-09\n  Strategic Evaluation, Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting (SEDCAR)\nIndicator 9: Disproportionality - Identification for Special Education\n  2008-09\nDid the school district have disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and \nrelated services that was the result of inappropriate policies, practices and procedures?No\nState target for 2008-09No school districts will have disproportionality \nthat is the result of inappropriate policies, \npractices and procedures.\nMeets State target? Yes\nIndicator 10A: Disproportionality in Specific Disability Categories\n  2008-09\nDid the school district have disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories \nthat was the result of inappropriate policies, practices and procedures?No\nState target for 2008-09No school districts will have disproportionality \nthat is the result of inappropriate policies, \npractices and procedures.\nMeets State target? Yes\nIndicator 10B: Disproportionality in Special Education Placements\n  2008-09\nDid the school district have disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in particular settings that was \nthe result of inappropriate policies, practices and procedures?No\nState target for 2008-09No school districts will have disproportionality \nthat is the result of inappropriate policies, \npractices and procedures.\nMeets State target? Yes page 6 of 7 Thu Jan 06 08:22:13 EST 2011 170801040000  New York State Education Department\nSpecial Education\nSchool District Data Profile for\nMayfield Central School District for 2008-09\n  Strategic Evaluation, Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting (SEDCAR)\nIndicator 11: Timely Evaluations (Child Find)\nIf data are not provided for this indicator, see the schedule posted at http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/sedcar/sppschedule.html for the school year in which this school district will \nreport data for this indicator.\n 2008-09\nPreschool School-age Combined\nNumber of students for whom parental consent to evaluate was received (July 1, 2008 to June \n30, 2009)\nNumber of students whose evaluations were completed within the State established timeline\nNumber of children whose evaluations were not completed within State established time lines, but \nfor reasons that are considered to be in compliance with State requirements\nCompliance Rate [Line 2 divided by (Line 1 minus Line 3)*100]\nState target for 2008-09     100%\nMeets State target?    \nIndicator 12: Early Childhood Transition\nIf data are not provided for this indicator, see the schedule posted at http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/sedcar/sppschedule.html for the school year in which this school district will \nreport data for this indicator.\n  2008-09\nNumber of children who were served in Part C and referred to Part B for eligibility determination\nNumber of those referred determined to be NOT eligible and whose eligibilities were determined prior to their third \nbirthday\nNumber of those found eligible who had an IEP developed and implemented by their third birthday\nNumber of children for whom delays in determination of eligibility or delays in implementing the IEP were caused by \nreasons that are in \"in compliance\" with State requirements\nCompliance Rate [Line 3 divided by (Line 1 minus Line 2 minus Line 4) *100]\nState target for 2008-09 100%\nMeets State target? page 7 of 7 Thu Jan 06 08:22:13 EST 2011 170801040000  New York State Education Department\nSpecial Education\nSchool District Data Profile for\nMayfield Central School District for 2008-09\n  Strategic Evaluation, Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting (SEDCAR)\nIndicator 13: Secondary Transition\nIf data are not provided for this indicator, see the schedule posted at http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/sedcar/sppschedule.html for the school year in which this school district will \nreport data for this indicator.\n  2008-09\nNumber of IEPs reviewed for students ages 15 and above\nPercent of IEPs of students ages 15 and above that include coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition \nservices that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post-secondary goals\nState target for 2008-09 100%\nMeets State target?\nIndicator 14: Post-School Outcomes\nData for this indicator will be posted beginning June 2008, in accordance with the schedule posted at http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/sedcar/sppschedule.html.\n  2008-09\nNumber of students interviewed to assess post-school outcomes one year after leaving high school\nPercent of students who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school, and who have been enrolled in some type of \npost-secondary school AND have been competitively employed within one year of leaving high school\nPercent of students who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school, and who have been enrolled in some type of \npost-secondary school within one year of leaving high school\nPercent of students who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school, and have been competitively employed within \none year of leaving high school\nPercent of students who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school, and who have been enrolled in some type of \npost-secondary school, have been competitively employed, or both, within one year of leaving high school (sum of \nthe three percentages above)\nState target for 2008-09 92% or higher\nMeets State target?" }

[ -0.11848684400320053, 0.09235486388206482, -0.06194464862346649, -0.027449989691376686, 0.08908097445964813, 0.04116113856434822, -0.01629387028515339, 0.0458693765103817, -0.0008079116814769804, 0.002528229495510459, 0.11654316633939743, -0.0012836414389312267, 0.012343905866146088, -0.04372101649641991, -0.06812195479869843, 0.012114692479372025, -0.10192012041807175, 0.034530140459537506, 0.012933498248457909, -0.006112405098974705, -0.02872471511363983, 0.05164216086268425, 0.019865931943058968, -0.05399058386683464, 0.014981008134782314, 0.09766004979610443, -0.033082954585552216, 0.05978919565677643, 0.01700490154325962, -0.0738874152302742, 0.0011395267210900784, 0.0413198284804821, 0.04864899069070816, 0.042721379548311234, 0.07786799222230911, 0.012520194053649902, -0.03760528936982155, -0.034963008016347885, -0.007004135753959417, 0.003911199048161507, 0.0340220145881176, -0.06007939577102661, 0.05873016640543938, 0.10382332652807236, 0.010070870630443096, 0.017014380544424057, -0.047228533774614334, 0.01467729639261961, -0.01346453744918108, 0.03190789371728897, -0.05147796869277954, -0.07630530744791031, -0.05635230615735054, 0.0988040566444397, -0.0268146600574255, -0.03215350955724716, -0.06912337988615036, 0.015335802920162678, 0.027678068727254868, 0.004234983120113611, 0.014970962889492512, -0.014687261544167995, -0.011938678100705147, 0.02275080792605877, 0.04766424000263214, -0.019978392869234085, 0.039245083928108215, -0.04194848611950874, 0.05352398753166199, 0.008062850683927536, 0.0066499048843979836, 0.03123060055077076, -0.07564098387956619, -0.025409547612071037, -0.07985512167215347, 0.0688372328877449, -0.0023418518248945475, 0.01813141256570816, 0.04352067410945892, -0.16076694428920746, -0.022397613152861595, 0.000029961334803374484, -0.000045509019400924444, 0.01599622331559658, 0.057434000074863434, 0.03087729960680008, -0.019158612936735153, -0.035249944776296616, 0.01432709489017725, 0.04888305068016052, 0.06078514829277992, -0.03336210921406746, 0.04956213757395744, 0.02001330628991127, -0.09844479709863663, -0.002692237263545394, 0.0546177513897419, 0.08703045547008514, 0.061607033014297485, 0.06729989498853683, -0.028713595122098923, -0.022301925346255302, 0.0071265120059251785, 0.032369956374168396, 0.022920187562704086, -0.013093641959130764, -0.032460037618875504, 0.08928319811820984, -0.061348263174295425, -0.07208122313022614, 0.029404517263174057, 0.0798298567533493, 0.004422765225172043, -0.041348814964294434, 0.03931346908211708, 0.038652315735816956, 0.044360652565956116, 0.07594508677721024, -0.013375209644436836, -0.015473670326173306, -0.006257309578359127, 0.0001443498331354931, -0.05544270947575569, -0.06018584221601486, -0.18249180912971497, -0.09035661816596985, 0.023649415001273155, 8.251324555563475e-33, 0.03344172239303589, -0.08936463296413422, -0.04175678268074989, 0.030320679768919945, 0.04526345059275627, 0.02555684931576252, -0.0031967777758836746, -0.0011186355259269476, -0.08676350861787796, 0.051840558648109436, -0.006300755776464939, -0.037282269448041916, 0.06366052478551865, -0.10377513617277145, -0.08156394213438034, 0.00667789950966835, -0.04718513786792755, 0.040046803653240204, -0.07489345967769623, -0.013580274768173695, 0.09141482412815094, -0.0009064905461855233, 0.002586142159998417, 0.030263349413871765, 0.020968778058886528, 0.0723208487033844, 0.05605850741267204, -0.060230325907468796, 0.025840915739536285, 0.017878524959087372, 0.08760210871696472, -0.007608129642903805, 0.03960787132382393, -0.007385908160358667, 0.07869252562522888, 0.1081370860338211, 0.02001391351222992, -0.06304535269737244, 0.039032354950904846, -0.02283545210957527, 0.0026833582669496536, -0.018234144896268845, -0.007482666987925768, -0.032810889184474945, 0.04253886640071869, -0.06237645074725151, 0.0128201087936759, 0.013837266713380814, -0.01750691793859005, 0.04238699749112129, -0.016458891332149506, 0.024975603446364403, 0.03076491318643093, -0.05501537024974823, -0.05510898679494858, -0.012482770718634129, -0.03279364854097366, 0.07837068289518356, 0.01603340357542038, 0.06406404078006744, 0.05848618969321251, 0.10654738545417786, -0.12075816839933395, -0.005719546694308519, -0.03489693999290466, -0.05046712979674339, -0.05189422145485878, -0.07368365675210953, -0.009490761905908585, -0.029164379462599754, 0.006284007802605629, -0.022053450345993042, 0.06689386069774628, -0.014770817011594772, -0.038072846829891205, -0.04383058845996857, -0.06439390033483505, 0.02621425688266754, -0.09863713383674622, -0.05215652287006378, -0.11903303116559982, 0.02311391942203045, -0.01964690536260605, -0.00024005852174013853, 0.012275375425815582, 0.05013267695903778, -0.02438804879784584, -0.06430515646934509, -0.09715661406517029, -0.006268473342061043, 0.04562545195221901, 0.03376995772123337, 0.038865260779857635, -0.006707821041345596, 0.04199925810098648, -6.594247801624559e-33, -0.016522081568837166, -0.03178335353732109, -0.01785886473953724, -0.00572979636490345, 0.027875687927007675, -0.04600059986114502, 0.015965694561600685, 0.026505790650844574, -0.03895311430096626, -0.01729717291891575, 0.08560745418071747, -0.03050195425748825, -0.023854177445173264, 0.027849877253174782, -0.013854267075657845, 0.02706291899085045, -0.025961939245462418, 0.04350387677550316, -0.07595310360193253, 0.06500372290611267, 0.10750463604927063, 0.05488219112157822, 0.02075391635298729, 0.11294947564601898, -0.005231977440416813, 0.003076449502259493, 0.058323029428720474, -0.001177990110591054, -0.00542644876986742, 0.05650239437818527, -0.0037107751704752445, -0.02181394211947918, -0.13722996413707733, 0.12811514735221863, 0.018406888470053673, -0.09116382896900177, 0.03922634944319725, -0.03077627904713154, 0.010154306888580322, 0.0762048065662384, 0.04896017536520958, 0.01773039996623993, -0.01830928400158882, 0.05456866696476936, -0.026058143004775047, 0.07764403522014618, 0.12067633122205734, 0.0042083072476089, 0.038930363953113556, -0.046963758766651154, -0.005564674269407988, 0.01207540649920702, 0.016429539769887924, 0.0981709286570549, -0.00037467267247848213, 0.02423286996781826, 0.051182202994823456, -0.04797331616282463, -0.03158698230981827, -0.00021398796525318176, 0.07762181758880615, 0.05366349220275879, -0.04237973690032959, -0.013981387950479984, 0.09928935021162033, -0.024310214444994926, -0.040868230164051056, 0.018482089042663574, 0.031288083642721176, -0.07185373455286026, -0.02285902015864849, -0.0143757164478302, 0.0284323301166296, -0.12643170356750488, 0.018790435045957565, -0.06033192202448845, -0.027537286281585693, 0.005023944657295942, -0.06522183865308762, -0.03578488901257515, 0.009577109478414059, -0.018521370366215706, 0.011369903571903706, 0.0681346133351326, -0.0004967465647496283, 0.034771546721458435, 0.06254197657108307, -0.04577236995100975, 0.012606851756572723, 0.03150331601500511, -0.08522950857877731, 0.053344059735536575, 0.05417157709598541, 0.03732730448246002, -0.01857423037290573, -3.8340626673516454e-8, -0.06471274793148041, -0.031400926411151886, -0.02918414957821369, -0.028229866176843643, 0.10090189427137375, 0.009332090616226196, -0.04999549314379692, -0.012630028650164604, -0.038050271570682526, -0.01910475827753544, 0.028417835012078285, 0.017429422587156296, -0.06295996904373169, -0.10288159549236298, -0.0031650445889681578, -0.04440242797136307, -0.07325783371925354, 0.03274717181921005, -0.027858836576342583, -0.026690948754549026, -0.013811085373163223, -0.05927029252052307, 0.06874489784240723, 0.05267423018813133, -0.013430053368210793, 0.050640009343624115, 0.030014285817742348, 0.041747599840164185, 0.0231194868683815, -0.05811382830142975, -0.019745733588933945, 0.05868532881140709, 0.03887578099966049, -0.04057909920811653, -0.033341262489557266, 0.023521963506937027, 0.04559417441487312, 0.029510825872421265, -0.004177072085440159, -0.029926227405667305, -0.02691570669412613, -0.016354085877537727, 0.008607585914433002, 0.08611368387937546, -0.0024197734892368317, -0.017054758965969086, -0.030727533623576164, -0.008637376129627228, -0.0619174987077713, -0.08863233029842377, -0.018317315727472305, -0.12547829747200012, 0.02401839755475521, 0.02676408179104328, -0.07508194446563721, 0.032786112278699875, 0.09071198850870132, 0.012228399515151978, -0.05074114724993706, -0.03258931264281273, 0.01977081038057804, 0.0208605770021677, 0.06130954623222351, -0.005018413998186588 ]

{ "pdf_file": "MDFT7WKB5IFQY7SPL4NGQCPMCQUNYSAM.pdf", "text": "Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 486 Filed 12/01/04 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:73-cv-00127-RCJ-WGC Document 486 Filed 12/01/04 Page 2 of 2" }

[ -0.044838033616542816, 0.010540175251662731, -0.030275395140051842, -0.028752673417329788, 0.07141333818435669, 0.09172505885362625, -0.03134676814079285, 0.07273345440626144, -0.03455818071961403, 0.050314079970121384, 0.09001961350440979, -0.03594954311847687, 0.03602255508303642, -0.06840929388999939, -0.029428670182824135, -0.028532367199659348, 0.04874854162335396, 0.024276312440633774, -0.029223652556538582, -0.0024119545705616474, 0.02611258067190647, -0.04883860424160957, 0.055812496691942215, -0.07382889091968536, -0.013883308507502079, 0.043145082890987396, -0.022387178614735603, -0.007971893064677715, -0.060468483716249466, -0.0237404927611351, 0.02796749770641327, 0.0077314311638474464, 0.006028997246176004, 0.04536357522010803, 0.01660458743572235, -0.07558631151914597, 0.0779060423374176, 0.06217261031270027, -0.0068415445275604725, -0.008906397968530655, -0.004361625760793686, -0.0453387051820755, -0.01360470149666071, -0.02807636372745037, -0.008475120179355145, -0.043971989303827286, -0.05585027113556862, -0.0035168789327144623, -0.018507573753595352, 0.0075316159054636955, -0.043335411697626114, -0.01035138126462698, -0.004080672282725573, 0.05496187135577202, -0.05373863875865936, -0.06273344159126282, -0.01858021318912506, -0.01903873309493065, 0.04261159524321556, -0.055781230330467224, -0.035782329738140106, 0.1403048038482666, -0.05389915406703949, 0.030934782698750496, -0.06362567842006683, -0.04233710840344429, 0.01150654535740614, -0.04786715283989906, 0.0838063657283783, 0.020617667585611343, 0.06280804425477982, 0.03633902966976166, 0.01209192257374525, -0.001692971563898027, -0.023463387042284012, 0.06164923682808876, 0.029943253844976425, -0.003345158416777849, 0.012681952677667141, -0.08714345097541809, -0.04058914631605148, -0.06333713978528976, -0.021007981151342392, -0.025835733860731125, 0.01147287618368864, -0.06466111540794373, -0.08845444023609161, -0.05948328599333763, 0.023808903992176056, -0.054622359573841095, 0.0521538183093071, 0.0504923090338707, 0.010731078684329987, -0.052809521555900574, 0.04331599548459053, -0.049299951642751694, -0.01674962043762207, 0.13349922001361847, -0.02096712589263916, 0.06230028718709946, -0.038916997611522675, 0.022825058549642563, -0.002898309612646699, 0.057268302887678146, 0.03585353493690491, -0.058903370052576065, 0.04566030949354172, 0.019431376829743385, -0.06403879821300507, -0.12192050367593765, 0.06068505719304085, -0.0025687911547720432, 0.1133313924074173, -0.012328346259891987, 0.04903640225529671, -0.009642226621508598, -0.002417826559394598, 0.04568956419825554, -0.0033342030365020037, 0.018581485375761986, 0.05938371643424034, 0.11887137591838837, -0.08145957440137863, 0.0808529257774353, -0.08017146587371826, -0.006749380845576525, -0.037386469542980194, 2.0748574379231393e-32, -0.0127088138833642, -0.037548862397670746, -0.049810491502285004, -0.038112822920084, -0.0045065865851938725, -0.03646285831928253, -0.04302787408232689, -0.04054370895028114, 0.04723476991057396, 0.04934469982981682, -0.07245364040136337, -0.12195571511983871, 0.027225803583860397, -0.06324504315853119, -0.036675356328487396, 0.12323495745658875, 0.01292494498193264, 0.002180329291149974, -0.09130316227674484, 0.01978205144405365, 0.0334632433950901, -0.05562977120280266, 0.0245504267513752, 0.048659153282642365, -0.0490771122276783, -0.022116515785455704, 0.02053118497133255, 0.031202785670757294, 0.010721891187131405, -0.00033144428743980825, 0.019678348675370216, 0.013593755662441254, 0.05500398948788643, 0.05304946005344391, -0.028021717444062233, 0.012713060714304447, 0.029546571895480156, -0.024485813453793526, -0.0004703749145846814, -0.009415833279490471, -0.057045623660087585, -0.0022259859833866358, -0.023747416213154793, -0.029104089364409447, -0.04193023964762688, -0.06859032809734344, -0.022664055228233337, -0.051718227565288544, 0.05034472420811653, 0.059452660381793976, 0.008648139424622059, -0.04060440510511398, -0.02229532040655613, 0.02377762272953987, -0.0839843824505806, 0.10377302020788193, -0.12921297550201416, 0.06255489587783813, 0.05414576828479767, 0.13924665749073029, 0.06024222448468208, 0.049171749502420425, -0.03298795223236084, -0.015973178669810295, -0.0951739102602005, -0.05064452812075615, 0.01584242843091488, -0.025276025757193565, 0.04461335018277168, -0.048616115003824234, -0.0004058387712575495, 0.028893379494547844, 0.11115819215774536, -0.048228614032268524, 0.029518479481339455, -0.019846364855766296, 0.14656110107898712, -0.03625448793172836, -0.035332947969436646, 0.017264319583773613, -0.016007445752620697, 0.01978798396885395, 0.0073228091932833195, 0.0272404495626688, -0.0023687195498496294, -0.02467459999024868, 0.04350188374519348, -0.10988595336675644, -0.0537751168012619, 0.04819876328110695, 0.02744753286242485, -0.11131816357374191, -0.03956279158592224, -0.030765997245907784, 0.025201493874192238, -1.9394754596653488e-32, -0.010255072265863419, -0.006091838702559471, -0.01844770461320877, -0.007667893078178167, 0.04115235060453415, -0.02332383021712303, -0.02563502825796604, -0.023534854874014854, 0.019728459417819977, -0.08310730010271072, -0.01624162681400776, 0.006006259936839342, 0.050687335431575775, 0.040989216417074203, -0.008722937665879726, 0.0010157105280086398, -0.012053892947733402, 0.04155667498707771, -0.07622919231653214, 0.00898898858577013, 0.0363883338868618, 0.09052658081054688, -0.040728505700826645, 0.031146952882409096, 0.03954717516899109, 0.03150688856840134, 0.030499566346406937, 0.04547014832496643, -0.038169775158166885, 0.07971525937318802, -0.04036911949515343, -0.001997550018131733, -0.0013835724676027894, 0.09037365019321442, -0.06827065348625183, -0.022225428372621536, 0.13184134662151337, -0.04658636078238487, -0.046386223286390305, -0.008096584118902683, 0.0000047416338020411786, -0.007710814010351896, -0.05399627983570099, -0.036197543144226074, -0.015582716092467308, 0.02804640680551529, -0.03486645221710205, 0.05203009769320488, 0.09856272488832474, -0.05198261886835098, 0.007587594445794821, 0.07560937851667404, -0.04475867375731468, 0.061872851103544235, -0.0037609648425132036, -0.04268500208854675, 0.028871020302176476, -0.051419470459222794, -0.05858166515827179, 0.009886622428894043, -0.02748708985745907, 0.07618658989667892, -0.05869570001959801, 0.020595362409949303, 0.0716819316148758, -0.058349501341581345, -0.07330142706632614, -0.03522539511322975, -0.08889276534318924, -0.02435847371816635, 0.00836740992963314, -0.10012964904308319, -0.03913962095975876, -0.08069441467523575, 0.03327597677707672, 0.029177434742450714, -0.00013601906539406627, 0.06585847586393356, -0.10271197557449341, -0.000630027090664953, 0.013513480313122272, -0.04610241949558258, 0.0021918124984949827, 0.0978107750415802, -0.07129353284835815, 0.07194735109806061, 0.02968812733888626, -0.036980364471673965, 0.01803859882056713, -0.03753882646560669, -0.01128873135894537, -0.1376110464334488, 0.05532832071185112, -0.002177064074203372, 0.0010680153500288725, -6.487268677801694e-8, 0.07081184536218643, 0.06131400913000107, -0.01897859387099743, 0.0526626817882061, 0.021425120532512665, 0.05353734269738197, -0.011972632259130478, -0.008302644826471806, -0.04661894589662552, 0.03366733714938164, 0.03248254954814911, 0.04277598857879639, 0.047309279441833496, -0.14234428107738495, -0.01274195872247219, -0.016317684203386307, -0.009821238927543163, -0.033965256065130234, -0.020339766517281532, -0.01892532967031002, -0.0021204957738518715, 0.01628369651734829, -0.0158100426197052, 0.05992892384529114, 0.003516609314829111, -0.05163181200623512, 0.005427973344922066, 0.09199082851409912, -0.03313279524445534, 0.02104342356324196, -0.03544959798455238, 0.01740683987736702, 0.025891520082950592, -0.08847381919622421, 0.055770985782146454, -0.01455795019865036, -0.04269956797361374, 0.09610269963741302, -0.052358418703079224, 0.030599068850278854, -0.005345584359019995, -0.08171136677265167, 0.04282765090465546, 0.032348811626434326, 0.014399544335901737, -0.013166040182113647, -0.08169642090797424, 0.025862744078040123, 0.09527503699064255, -0.07399726659059525, -0.04707982391119003, -0.034559812396764755, 0.02663852460682392, -0.028059914708137512, 0.07232366502285004, 0.010585349053144455, 0.03560628741979599, 0.00922132097184658, -0.028346184641122818, 0.006212398875504732, 0.13618409633636475, -0.010630090720951557, -0.005170181859284639, -0.06314561516046524 ]

{ "pdf_file": "AG62TAHBIVHRPIZC4SJHTXWHNFOKTYL5.pdf", "text": "TRIAL CALENDAR \nOCTOBER 5, 2009 \n(AGE REFLECTS ACTUAL AGE ON DAY OF TRIAL) \n \nDEFENDANT \nAGE \nCHARGES TRIAL \nDAYS \nDAG \nDEF ATTY \nTAYE, JOSEPH \n0812020623 \n \nNON-CAPITAL - JUDGE HERLIHY D 230 MURDER 1ST \nMURDER 2ND \nASSAULT 1ST 2 WKS LUGG HURLEY \n \nTRIAL CALENDAR \nOCTOBER 6, 2009 \n(AGE REFLECTS ACTUAL AGE ON DAY OF TRIAL) \n \nDEFENDANT \nAGE \nCHARGES TRIAL \nDAYS \nDAG \nDEF ATTY \nGEORGE, MONIR \n0805035299 \n \nNON-CAPITAL - JUDGE JURDEN \nBENCH TRIAL D 357 MURDER 1ST \nPFDCF \nATT MURDER 1ST 3 WKS WALSH \nGRUBB K. VAN \nAMERONGEN \nLEAGER \nAMES, EDWARD \n0904017791 \n D 120 BURGLARY 2ND \nCONSP 2ND \nTHEFT MV 2 DAYS GRUBB WHARTON \nASHLEY, LIONEL \n0905024381 \n D 92 HOME IMP FRAUD 2 DAYS HAYES EDINGER \nBARBATO, VITO \n0905006806 \n 120 BURGLARY 2ND \nROBBERY 2ND \nEND WELF CHILD 2 DAYS WHITE K. VAN \nAMERONGEN \nBORSELLO, MATTHEW \n0905006049 \n D 120 BURGLARY 2ND \nTHEFT < 1000 \nCRIM MISC < 1000 2 DAYS WHITE O’CONNELL \nBOURDON, JASON \n0902015390 \n D 162 BURGLARY 2ND \nROBBERY 2ND \nCONSP 2ND 2 DAYS CARROLL MAURER \nBROWN, ANTHONY \n0902005408 \n D 204 ROBBERY 1ST \nBURGLARY 1ST \nPFDCF 3 DAYS FRAWLEY HEYDEN \nDENNIS, MEGAN \n0905008049 \nDETAINER CAPIAS AT FCR 9/28 \n \nTORTEROTOT, THERESA \n0905008041 \nFINAL C/R ON 10/5/09 \n 84 \n \n \n \n92 FORGERY 2ND \nCONSP 2ND \nTHEFT < 1000 2 DAYS CARROLL HEYDEN \n \n \n \nJOHNSON \nDIXON, ROBERT \n0902023712 \n S 162 ROBBERY 1ST \nASSAULT 1ST \nTHEFT SENIOR 2 DAYS WOOD WITHERELL \nHAIRSTON, ROBERT \n0903009103 \n 162 TRF IL DR 10-50G \nPWITD NSI CS \nMAINT VEHICLE 2 DAYS NORRIS BUTLER \nHARRIS, TYRONE \n0903003750 \n D 148 BURGLARY 2ND \nATT BURGLARY 2ND \nINDEC EXP 2ND 2 DAYS WELCH TEASE \nHERNANDEZ, ROBERTO \n0903022282 \n D 162 TRF COC 50-100G \nPWITD NSI CS \nMAINT DWELLING 2 DAYS ROBERTSON ARMSTRONG \nJONES, MARCELLOUS \n0903020716 \n D 162 TRF COC > 100G \nPFDCF \nPWITD NSII CS 2 DAYS MCBRIDE FOLEY \nNOWAK, AIMEE \n0905024151 \n \nCAPIAS AT FCR ON 9/28/09 84 THEFT 1000 OR > \nOFF TOUCHING 2 DAYS HAYES LEAGER PERSKII, LEONID \n0903015996 \n \nSUPP HRNG ON 10/2/09 (JAP) 162 TRAFF IN MDMA \nPDWDCF \nPOS W/I SCH 1 2 DAYS MCBRIDE WOLOSHIN \nROJAS, DANIEL \n0905000881 \n 92 CRIM MISC 1500 \nCONSP 2ND \nRESIST ARREST 2 DAYS CARROLL GOFF \nSALAMON, FRANK \n0906003902 \n 106 MAN SCH1 CONTROL \nPOS W/I SCH1 \nMAINT DWELLING 2 DAYS DENNEY MAURER \nSOMMERS, PAUL \n0801019271 \n \nPLEA BY APPT ON 10/1/09 \nASSIGNED TO JUDGE TOLIVER D 568 RAPE 1ST CRIME \nUNLAW IMPR 2ND \nPDWBPP CHAPMAN KOYSTE \nSTOKES, WILLIAM \n0903022781 \n \nPLEA or RE (JRS) \nCAPIAS AT FCR ON 9/28/09 156 ASSAULT 2ND \nPDWDCF \nPOSS DRUG PARAP 2 DAYS DOWNS COLLINS \nTAYLOR, RICHARD \n0903009005 \n 162 RAPE 2ND WO CONS CHAPMAN O’CONNELL \nWICKES, CLARISSA \n0906001955 \n \nCAPIAS AT FCR ON 9/28/09 111 POSS 300’ PARK \nPOSS 1000’ SCHOOL \nPOSS, USE, CONS N 2 DAYS NORRIS HEYDEN \n \nTRIAL CALENDAR \nOCTOBER 8, 2009 \n(AGE REFLECTS ACTUAL AGE ON DAY OF TRIAL) \n \nDEFENDANT \nAGE \nCHARGES TRIAL \nDAYS \nDAG \nDEF ATTY \nBATCHELOR, STEVEN \n0904009141 \n 122 IDENTITY THEFT \nTHEFT 1000 OR > \nHARASSMENT 2 DAYS KNOLL COLLINS \nBECKHAM, ELIJAH \n0906001015 \n \nSUPP HRNG ON 10/2/09 (FSS) \nFINAL C/R ON 10/5/09 94 CCDW \nTINTED LICENSE \nDUTY-SIGN-CARRY 2 DAYS FRAWLEY SAVITZ \nCOLE, CHRISTOPHER \n0810016170 \n \nCAPIAS AT FCR ON 9/28/09 \n199 PREVIOUS CAPIAS DAYS 109 RESIST ARREST \nOFF TOUCHING LE \nDISORD CONDUCT 2 DAYS DWYER GOFF \nCURRAN, CAITLIN \n0905015548 \n D 94 THEFT 1000 OR > \nUNLAW USE > 1000 2 DAYS GATTO CHAPMAN \nDIELEUTERIO, GERARD \n0812016255 \n 248 THEFT 1000 OR > \nFALSIFY BUS REC CARROLL STONER \nDUNN, CHARLES \n0905024600 \n \nCAPIAS AT FCR ON 9/21/09 77 DIST 300’ PARK \nPOSS, USE, CONS N \nLOITER 2 DAYS FARAONE PANKOWSKI \nFAIRLEY, JEFFERY \n0901012109 \n \nFINAL C/R ON 10/5/09 112 THEFT MV \nTHEFT 1000 OR > \nCRIM MISC < 1000 2 DAYS GATTO LETANG \nGARCIA, PABLO \n0904009263 \n \nPLEA BY APPT ON 10/1/09 122 BURGLARY 2ND \nCRIM CNTMPT DVP \nCR CONTEMPT PFA 2 DAYS SCULLY TEASE \nGARDEN, LAVETT \n0906008021 \n \nFINAL C/R ON 10/5/09 94 UNLAW USE > 62 \nTHEFT < 1000 \nATT THEFT < 1000 2 DAYS GATTO O’CONNELL HILL, BRANDON \n0902002692 \n D 206 PWITD NSII CS \nMAINT VEHICLE \nPOSS, USE, CONS N 2 DAYS MCBRIDE WILKINSON \nHINSON, ALFRED \n0906008698 \n S 94 DIST 300’ PARK \nPOSS, USE, CONS N \nPOSS MARIJUANA 2 DAYS NORRIS FIGLIOLA \nKUBIR, IRFAN \n0906009811 \n \nFINAL C/R ON 10/5/09 94 STALKING 2 DAYS HRIVNAK ZEMBLE \nMARTINEZ, RICARDO \n0712010518 \n D 146 PWITD NSII CS \nPOSS 1000’ SCHOOL 2 DAYS GATTO MAURER \nMILLER, DUWON \n0904024128 \n \nFINAL C/R ON 10/5/09 122 PWITD NSI CS \nDIST 300’ PARK \nRESIST ARREST 2 DAYS DENNEY KOYSTE \nMOORE, KYSHAAN \n0905008246 \n \nCAPIAS AT FCR ON 9/28/08 154 BURGLARY 2ND \nTHEFT 1000 OR > \nCONSP 2ND 2 DAYS MARTYNIAK HILLIS \nMORALES, LEVAN \n0804005459 \n \nCAPIAS AT FCR ON 9/28/08 \n366 PREVIOUS CAPIAS DAYS 96 PFBPP DRUG CONV \nRESIST ARREST 2 DAYS WOOD ARMSTRONG \nMULDROW, QUINTIN \n0905008187 \n S 122 ATT BURGLARY 2ND 2 DAYS FRAWLEY EDINGER \nROBERT, HECTOR \n0601008627 \n \n1155 PREVIOUS CAPIAS DAYS D 155 PWITD NSII CS \nMAINT VEHICLE \nPOSS, USE, CONS N 2 DAYS FARAONE MANNING \nRODERICK, DAVID \n0901007534 \n \nFINAL C/R ON 10/5/09 94 THEFT 1000 OR > 2 DAYS CARROLL JOHNSON \nRODGERS, DARON \n0906024949 \n S 94 FAIL TO REGIST \nOFR FAL I F/FIL \nTRES W/I/T PEEP 2 DAYS WALSH MANNING \nRODRIGUEZ, EDWIN \n0906003861 \n 94 NONC W/CON BOND \nCRIM MISC < 1000 2 DAYS KNOLL MALIK \nTYLER, DARRYL \n0904006951 \n \nPLEA BY APPT ON 10/7/09 122 PWITD NSII CS \nDEL NSII CS \nPOSS DRUG PARAP 2 DAYS MCBRIDE HILLIS \n " }

[ -0.0450623445212841, -0.006729360204190016, 0.018967511132359505, -0.08808190375566483, 0.03923850506544113, -0.002473309403285384, 0.060344148427248, 0.059925626963377, 0.026418182998895645, 0.005642392672598362, 0.0649157240986824, 0.03750088810920715, 0.05599593743681908, -0.034356746822595596, -0.013691217638552189, 0.06903568655252457, 0.08306929469108582, 0.02655290625989437, -0.049731262028217316, 0.012125630863010883, 0.047707680612802505, 0.02576117403805256, 0.03415924310684204, 0.01440964825451374, 0.007709364872425795, 0.019551701843738556, -0.04379081726074219, -0.016320664435625076, 0.008436601608991623, -0.056881826370954514, 0.046135202050209045, 0.038120124489068985, -0.023155106231570244, 0.020664073526859283, 0.07340376824140549, -0.03700140118598938, -0.019479522481560707, -0.0069121397100389, 0.021853670477867126, 0.005334915593266487, 0.08225986361503601, -0.07294782996177673, -0.025176990777254105, 0.00804122257977724, -0.08412258327007294, -0.01089590322226286, 0.03626898676156998, 0.023661570623517036, -0.018402446061372757, -0.010008249431848526, 0.04208509996533394, -0.05908190831542015, -0.00577979302033782, 0.035401687026023865, -0.09466226398944855, -0.07020490616559982, 0.026611777022480965, 0.055348388850688934, 0.027917131781578064, 0.04939567297697067, 0.05558519810438156, 0.020426267758011818, -0.027865635231137276, -0.02571265399456024, 0.04013153910636902, 0.03935888037085533, 0.047674510627985, -0.09039449691772461, 0.012188466265797615, 0.004137993324548006, 0.06518656015396118, 0.042468197643756866, -0.007895534858107567, 0.05092591792345047, -0.050441283732652664, 0.02852773480117321, -0.015224681235849857, 0.04361702501773834, 0.04570632800459862, -0.09264083951711655, -0.006137406453490257, -0.04391111433506012, 0.029415881261229515, -0.03641544654965401, -0.03904936835169792, -0.07480353862047195, -0.09177789837121964, 0.05729439854621887, 0.04056737944483757, -0.010454191826283932, 0.029591063037514687, -0.033194322139024734, -0.011899427510797977, -0.01562708429992199, -0.015083848498761654, -0.03374785557389259, -0.0680849626660347, 0.019565852358937263, 0.03489735722541809, 0.06479230523109436, -0.007270485628396273, 0.03384474664926529, -0.0714876800775528, -0.07706846296787262, 0.03809032589197159, -0.04669173061847687, -0.02007242478430271, 0.050657276064157486, -0.00793607346713543, -0.0362948440015316, -0.024711117148399353, 0.019243234768509865, 0.0509171187877655, 0.00565507123246789, 0.012586958706378937, 0.055433377623558044, -0.014610674232244492, 0.11443231254816055, 0.00021415208175312728, -0.11551333963871002, 0.002578496001660824, 0.05166281759738922, -0.08764240890741348, -0.012829984538257122, 0.0315912626683712, -0.07670190185308456, -0.038367629051208496, 6.130059408822238e-33, -0.022335710003972054, 0.03354034572839737, 0.021812496706843376, -0.019013725221157074, 0.05409468710422516, 0.005080233793705702, 0.013057814911007881, -0.001098446431569755, 0.01202445663511753, 0.02646705135703087, -0.00034751658677123487, -0.07275828719139099, 0.09136834740638733, -0.08986067771911621, -0.05347688868641853, -0.03736773133277893, -0.015012361109256744, 0.006302409339696169, -0.08226393908262253, -0.05662048980593681, 0.14506661891937256, -0.02235269919037819, -0.008123042061924934, 0.06226561963558197, -0.11950286477804184, -0.024519339203834534, -0.06763902306556702, 0.0407409742474556, -0.00735046062618494, -0.012255243957042694, -0.056192949414253235, 0.05937466770410538, 0.10036676377058029, 0.06353779137134552, 0.1086762472987175, -0.021200688555836678, 0.043552465736866, -0.003424657741561532, -0.039140649139881134, -0.025602977722883224, 0.039629291743040085, 0.0872625783085823, 0.002713925903663039, 0.010358385741710663, -0.029787493869662285, -0.07022111117839813, -0.08163125067949295, -0.009835743345320225, 0.02792396768927574, 0.06881256401538849, 0.06847059726715088, -0.014720196835696697, 0.038972970098257065, -0.028598932549357414, -0.04078231751918793, 0.039384592324495316, -0.12028095871210098, -0.004535014741122723, 0.00800176989287138, 0.09065238386392593, 0.06559369713068008, 0.08171431720256805, -0.07734812051057816, -0.04290291666984558, -0.06930406391620636, -0.06176307424902916, -0.055208269506692886, -0.01339448057115078, -0.009376481175422668, -0.037255603820085526, 0.008264166302978992, 0.12044107913970947, 0.0237269289791584, -0.02543315291404724, 0.02119586244225502, -0.10188837349414825, 0.0007542822859250009, -0.00498207937926054, -0.004599809646606445, -0.06509067863225937, -0.08788492530584335, -0.08366857469081879, 0.025946494191884995, 0.015763619914650917, 0.027214908972382545, -0.04582460597157478, -0.04552827402949333, -0.028082486242055893, -0.018433060497045517, 0.0633019506931305, 0.017554422840476036, -0.02969018928706646, -0.07414361089468002, 0.005040643271058798, 0.027982961386442184, -6.301237467582872e-33, -0.04227110370993614, -0.009997086599469185, -0.0029357478488236666, 0.08196853846311569, 0.05029851943254471, -0.011601907201111317, 0.06249905377626419, -0.009324447251856327, -0.04670753329992294, -0.10396715998649597, -0.05364725738763809, 0.03421064093708992, 0.09562695026397705, 0.1108483299612999, -0.07778855413198471, 0.05355929955840111, -0.02237325720489025, 0.02259054407477379, -0.01455604750663042, 0.034756164997816086, 0.02638375386595726, 0.0678541287779808, -0.07106831669807434, 0.048154473304748535, 0.00517552113160491, -0.05969677120447159, 0.07605929672718048, 0.028819847851991653, 0.05437321215867996, 0.0880209431052208, -0.01628684066236019, 0.0015807673335075378, -0.005935362074524164, 0.016348043456673622, -0.03790343552827835, -0.05175616219639778, 0.11929123103618622, -0.00039442439447157085, -0.02287432551383972, 0.02870437502861023, -0.020352201536297798, 0.025847313925623894, -0.014203062281012535, 0.022879036143422127, -0.026946643367409706, 0.0876418948173523, 0.07805413007736206, 0.05283170938491821, -0.004466364160180092, -0.008500790223479271, -0.022135967388749123, 0.022177496924996376, 0.005895181093364954, 0.08301233500242233, 0.039961982518434525, -0.016292888671159744, -0.02722317911684513, -0.014032765291631222, -0.05732504278421402, -0.02678465098142624, 0.034286122769117355, 0.13380876183509827, -0.004500001668930054, -0.13254381716251373, 0.12541291117668152, 0.01662389002740383, -0.057325612753629684, -0.031629253178834915, 0.041542571038007736, -0.01107683964073658, 0.016776710748672485, -0.1239405944943428, -0.06058754399418831, -0.08827634155750275, 0.05780190974473953, -0.0014956668019294739, 0.07807980477809906, -0.009698860347270966, -0.11588826030492783, -0.03577165678143501, -0.025883445516228676, -0.05514201149344444, -0.01282763946801424, -0.01437106542289257, 0.0236132200807333, 0.09967493265867233, 0.023627597838640213, -0.06506925821304321, 0.00321444240398705, 0.09380301833152771, 0.03517662361264229, -0.033172089606523514, 0.04019548371434212, 0.06412346661090851, -0.00827106460928917, -6.390389728494483e-8, -0.04560287296772003, 0.05807013064622879, -0.04477584734559059, 0.013909970410168171, 0.08631451427936554, 0.07640768587589264, 0.07444711029529572, -0.03265455365180969, 0.006750996224582195, 0.005861285608261824, 0.058354172855615616, -0.03108317404985428, -0.010952436365187168, -0.06965997070074081, 0.005633389111608267, -0.020269859582185745, -0.030326329171657562, 0.0013223622227087617, -0.06878557801246643, 0.004334933124482632, -0.09663534164428711, -0.027388975024223328, -0.042718660086393356, 0.032456155866384506, 0.020577089861035347, -0.06170579046010971, -0.025330889970064163, 0.0195098165422678, -0.015588964335620403, -0.015423535369336605, -0.026828063651919365, 0.06075369939208031, -0.04650869965553284, -0.06104247272014618, -0.04982529580593109, -0.025424018502235413, -0.04747205600142479, 0.07850971072912216, 0.07413840293884277, 0.036619883030653, -0.013939199969172478, 0.0019726858008652925, -0.00747881643474102, 0.0306257214397192, 0.06156762316823006, 0.0007042670622467995, -0.08843713998794556, -0.058187391608953476, 0.03487100079655647, -0.0559731125831604, 0.017946608364582062, -0.07802651822566986, -0.02089570090174675, 0.04573184251785278, 0.0982339009642601, 0.08692602068185806, -0.0029308777302503586, -0.021116206422448158, -0.052933789789676666, -0.00435500405728817, -0.004275991581380367, 0.019764220342040062, 0.02057773806154728, -0.06241598725318909 ]

{ "pdf_file": "I74UK7CA3VD36AJLDMBKXZHMRBRV6KNF.pdf", "text": "IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA \n \nSHAWN G. HARRIS, Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 5:06CV141 Criminal Action No. 5:05CR41-01 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (JUDGE STAMP) Respondent. \nREPORT AND RECOMMENDATION\n \nTHAT §2255 MOTION BE DENIED AS TO THREE GROUNDS, SETTING AN \nEVIDENTIARY HEARING ON GROUND ONE, APPOINTING COUNSEL FOR THE \nEVIDENTIARY HEARING AND PROVID ING THAT COUNSEL, PARTIES AND \nWITNESSES MORE THAN 40 MILES FROM THE WHEELING POINT OF HOLDING \nCOURT MAY APPEAR BY VIDEO OR TELEPHONE CONFERENCING \n \n \n \nI. INTRODUCTION \n \n On November 20, 2006, pro se petitioner filed a Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to \nVacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Pers on in Federal Custody. The Government filed its \nResponse January 26, 2007. Petitioner filed a Res ponse to the Government’s Response February \n6, 2007. \nII. FACTS \nA. Conviction and Sentence \n On October 14, 2005, petitioner signed a plea agreement by which he agreed to plead \nguilty to Count One, conspiracy to distribute more than five (5) grams of cocaine base, in \nviolation of Title 21, United States Code, Sectio ns 846 and 841(b)(1)(B). In the plea agreement, \nthe parties stipulated to the tota l drug relevant conduct of between thirty-five (35) and fifty (50) \ngrams of cocaine base. Additionally , the petitioner waived his right to appeal and to collaterally 2attack his sentence. Specifi cally, the petitioner’s plea agreement contained the following \nlanguage regarding his waiver: \n11. Mr. Harris is aware that Ti tle 18, United States Code, \nSection 3742 affords a defendant th e right to appeal the sentence \nimposed. Acknowledging all this, and in exchange for the concessions made by the United Stat es in this plea agreement, if \nthe Court sentences defendant to 97 months or less, defendant \nknowingly and voluntarily waives th e right to appeal his sentence \nor in the manner in which that sentence was determined on any ground whatever, including those grounds set forth in Title 18, \nUnited States Code, Section 3742. Th e defendant also waives his \nright to challenge his sentence or the manner in which it was \ndetermined in any collateral att ack, including but not limited to, a \nmotion brought under Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255 (habeas corpus). Correspondingly, the United States waives its \nright to appeal if the Court senten ces the defendant to 78 months or \nmore. Neither of these ranges are representative of defendant’s \nestimation of a reasonable sentence, nor does this waiver prevent defendant from arguing for a sentence below 78 months. \n On October 16, 2005, the petitioner entered his pl ea in open court. Petitioner was 31 years \nold and a high school graduate. (Plea transcript p. 4) Petitioner stated he understood and agreed \nwith all the terms and conditi ons of the plea agreement. (Id\n. at 11) The Court specifically asked \nif petitioner understood the waiver of appell ate and post-conviction relief rights. (Id . at 12-13; \n16-17) The Court asked petitioner’s counsel if he believed pet itioner understood the waiver of \nappellate and post-convic tion relief rights. (Id . at 12) The Court then reviewed all the rights \npetitioner was giving up by pleading guilty. (Id . at 17-20) During th e plea hearing, the \nGovernment presented the tes timony of Special Agent Robert Manchas of the United States \nDrug Enforcement Administration to esta blish a factual basis for the plea. (Id . at 20-22). The \npetitioner did not contest the factual basis of the plea. \n After the Government presente d the factual basis of the plea, the petitioner advised the \nCourt that he was guilty of C ount One of the indictment. (Id . at 23) The petitioner further stated 3under oath that no one had attempted to force him to plead guilty. (Id .) In addition, he testified \nthat the plea was not the result of any promises other than those contained in the plea agreement. \n(Id.) The petitioner testified that his attorney had adequately represented him, and that his \nattorney had left nothing undone. (Id . at 24) Finally, petitioner said he was in fact guilty of the \ncrime to which he was pleading guilty (Id .) \n At the conclusion of the hear ing, the Court determined that the plea was made freely and \nvoluntarily, that the petitioner understood the consequences of pleading guilty; and that the \nelements of Count One were established beyond a reasonable doubt. (Id . at 24-25) The \npetitioner did not object to the Court’s finding. \n On December 12, 2005 and December 16, 2005, the petitioner appeared before the Court \nfor sentencing. After considering several factors, including the circumstances of both the crime \nand the defendant, and the sentencing objectiv es of punishment, the Court sentenced the \npetitioner to a term of 57 months imprisonment. \nB. Appeal \n Petitioner did not file an appeal of his conviction or sentence. \nC. Federal Habeas Corpus \n On November 20, 2006, petitione r initiated this case unde r § 2255. In the motion, the \npetitioner asserts that his counsel was ineffectiv e for failing to file a not ice of appeal upon his \nrequest. He further contends that his counsel was ineffective for not obtaining further sentence \nreductions per Rule 35 for petitioner’s substantial assistance to the Government. Petitioner contends that his sentence s hould be reduced under a potential new law, which addresses the \ndifference in crack cocaine and powder cocain e under the Sentencing Guidelines. Lastly, \npetitioner requests an evidenti ary hearing on these matters. 4In its response to the moti on, the Government asserts that under Fourth Circuit law, \ncounsel’s failure to file a notice of appeal when requested to do so is per se ineffective assistance \nand that an evidentiary hearing is appropriate for this issue. However, the government contends \nthat petitioner’s counsel was not ineffective for not moving for the Rule 35 motion, as defense \ncounsel has no legal authority to so. The Govern ment further clarifies that petitioner did not \nwork as a confidential informan t to receive substantial assist ance, but received a sentence \nreduction under the safety vale and for acceptanc e of responsibility. Finally, the Government \ncontends that petitioner’s request for relief based on anticipated Congressional action is \npremature and moot. \nD. Recommendation \n Based upon a review of the record, the unders igned recommends that the petitioner’s § \n2255 motion be denied and dismissed from the docket because petitioner knowingly, \nintelligently, and voluntarily waived the right to collaterally attack the sentence with the \nexception of an evidentiary hearing to determine wh ether petitioner requested his attorney to file \nan appeal and whether counsel i gnored or refused instructions. \nIII. ANALYSIS \nA. Waiver \n “[T]he guilty plea and the often concomitant plea bargain are important components of \nthis country’s criminal justice system. Properly administered, they can benefit all concerned.” \nBlackledge v. Allison , 431 U.S. 63, 71 (1977). However, the a dvantages of plea bargains “can be \nsecure . . . only if dispositions by guilty plea are accorded a great measure of finality.” Id. “To \nthis end, the Government often s ecures waivers of appellate rights from criminal defendants as \npart of their plea agreement. ” United States v. Lemaster , 403 F.3d 216, 220 (4th Cir. 2005). 5 In United States v. Attar , 38 F.3d 727 (4th Cir. 1994), the Fourth Circuit found that “a \nwaiver-of-appeal-rights provision in a valid plea agreement is enforceable against the defendant \nso long as it is the result of a knowing and intelligent decision to forgo the right to appeal.” Attar \nat 731. The Fourth Circuit then found that whethe r a waiver is knowing and intelligent “depends \nupon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding [its making], including the background, \nexperience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. After upholding the general validity of a waiver-of-\nappeal-rights provision, the Fourth Circuit noted that even with a waiver-of-appeals-rights \nprovision, a defendant may obt ain appellate review of certain limited grounds. Id. at 732. For \nexample, the Court noted that a defendant “could not be said to have waived his right to appellate \nreview of a sentence imposed in excess of th e maximum penalty provided by statute or based on \na constitutionally impermissibl e factor such as race.” Id. Nor did the Court believe that a \ndefendant “can fairly be said to have waived his right to a ppeal his sentence on the ground that \nthe proceedings following the entry of the guilty plea were conducted in violation of the Sixth \nAmendment right to counsel.” Id. \n Subsequently, in United States v. Lemaster , supra , the Fourth Circui t saw no reason to \ndistinguish between waivers of di rect appeal rights and waiver s of collateral attack rights. \nLemaster , 403 F.3d at 220. Therefore, like waiver-o f-appeal-rights provision, the Court found \nthat the waiver of the right to collaterally attack a sentence is va lid as long as it is knowing and \nvoluntary. Id. And, although, the Court expressly decl ined to address whether the same \nexceptions apply since Lemaster failed to make such an argument, the court stressed that it “saw \nno reason to distinguish between wa ivers of direct-appeal rights a nd waivers of collateral-attack \nrights.” Id. at n. 2. 6 Based on these cases, it appear s that ineffective assistance of counsel claims are barred \nby a valid waiver, to the extent that the facts giving rise to th e claims occurred prior to the \ndefendant entering his guilty plea. Only claims ar ising after the entry of the guilty plea may fall \noutside the scope of the waiver. Lemaster , 403 F.3d at 732 (it cannot be fairly said that a \ndefendant “waived his right to appeal his sentence on the ground that the proceedings following \nentry of the guilty plea were conducted in violati on of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, for \na defendant’s agreement to waive appellate revi ew of his sentence is implicitly conditioned on \nthe assumption that the proceedings following entr y of the plea will be conducted in accordance \nwith constitutional limitations.”) Therefore, when reviewing an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in a case where \nthere is a waiver of collateral-a ttack rights in a plea agreement, we must first determine whether \nthere is valid waiver. In doing so, \nThe validity of an appeal waiver depends on whether the defendant \nknowingly and intelligen tly agreed to waive the right to appeal. \nAlthough this determination is of ten made based on adequacy of \nthe plea colloquy -- specifically, whether the district court \nquestioned the defendant about the appeal waiver – the issue ultimately is evaluated by reference to the totality of the circumstances. Thus, the determin ation must depend, in each case, \nupon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding that case, including the background, experien ce, and conduct of the accused. \n United States v. Blick\n, 408 F.3d 162, 169 (4th Cir. 2005) (i nternal citations and quotations \nomitted). In other words, the Court must examine the act ual waiver provision, the plea agreement as a \nwhole, the plea colloquy, and the defendant’s ability to understand the proceedings. Id.\n If the \nCourt finds that the waiver is va lid, any IAC claims arising prior to the plea agreement are barred \nby the waiver. 7 As to any IAC claims made regarding an atto rney’s action, or lack th ereof, after the plea \nagreement, the Fourth Circuit has stated, “[w]e do not think the general wa iver of the right to \nchallenge” a sentence on the ground that “the proceedings following entry of the guilty plea – \nincluding both the sentencing hearing itself and th e presentation of the motion to withdraw their \npleas – were conducted in violation of their Sixth Amendment right to counsel.” Lemaster , 403 \nF.3d at 732-33. Therefore, upon first blush it appears that IAC claims arising after the guilty plea \nand/or during sentencing, are not barred by a general waiver-of appeal rights. \n However, several courts have distinguishe d IAC claims raised in a § 2255 case, from \nthose raised on direct appeal . In Braxton v. United States , 358 F.Supp.2d 497 (W.D Va. 2005), \nthe Western District of Virginia noted that although the Fourth Circuit has yet to define the scope \nof waiver of collateral rights, several courts ha ve held that § 2255 waiv ers should be subject to \nthe same conditions and exceptions applicable to waivers of the right to file a direct appeal. \nBraxton at 502 (citing United States v. Cannady , 283 F.3d 641,645 n. 3 (4th Cir. 2000) \n(collecting cases); Butler v. United States , 173 F.Supp.2d 489, 493 (E.D. Va. 2001)). \nNonetheless, the Western District of Virginia, di stinguished the types of IAC claims available on \ndirect appeal from those available in a § 2255 motion. Specifica lly, the Court noted: \n Appellate courts rarely hear ineffective assistance of \ncounsel claims on direct review. In deed, ‘[i]t is we ll settled that a \nclaim of ineffective assistance should be raised in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion in the district court rather than on direct appeal, \nunless the record conclusively shows ineffective assistance.’ United States v. King\n, 119 F.3d 290, 295 (4th Cir. 1997). \nTherefore, the waiver exception recognized in Attar applies only to \na very narrow category of cases. In contrast, a rule that defendants \nare unable to waive their right to bring an ineffective assistance \nclaim in a § 2255 would create a la rge exception to the scope of § \n2255 waivers. In fact, such an exception would render all such waivers virtually meaningless because most habeas challenges can be pressed into the mold of a Sixth Amendment claim on collateral \nreview. The Fifth Circuit has re cognized this dynamic by noting 8that ‘[i]f all ineffective assistan ce of counsel claims were immune \nfrom waiver, any complaint about process could be brought in a \ncollateral attack by merely challenging the attorney’s failure to achieve the desired result. A knowi ng and intelligent waiver should \nnot be so easily evaded.’ United States v. White\n, 307 F.3d 336, 344 \n(5th Cir. 2002). \nBraxton at 503. \n The Western District of Virginia furthe r noted that the Tenth Circuit has also \ndistinguished collateral-attack waivers from the situation in Attar and that the Fourth Circuit’s \nholding in United States v. Broughton-Jones , 71 F.3d 1143,1147 (4th Cir. 1995), also supports \nsuch distinction. Braxton at 503, n. 2. Finally, the Braxton Court found it persuasive that the \nmajority of circuits to have confronted this qu estion “have held that co llateral attacks claiming \nineffective assistance of counsel that do not call into question the validity of the plea or the § \n2255 waiver itself, or do not relate d directly to the plea agreement or the waiver, are waivable.” \nId. at 503. (collecting cases). \n In this case, petitioner assert s that he requested his counsel to appeal the errors made at \nhis sentencing, but that counsel fa iled to respond to his request . Therefore, petitioner asserts \ncounsel was per se ineffective for failing to file a notice of appeal as in structed. As held in \nUnited States v. Poindexter , 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 15360 (4th Cir. 2007) an evidentiary hearing \nis required in such cases to determine whet her the petitioner unequivoc ally instructed his \nattorney to file a notice of a ppeal or, if his attorney was not so instructed, the court will \ndetermine if petitioner met his bu rden of showing that: (1) his attorney had a duty to consult \nunder Roe v. Flores-Ortega , 528 U.S. 470 (2000); (2) his attorney failed to fulfill his consultation \nobligations; and (3) he was prejudiced by his at torney’s failure to fulfill these obligations. \n Accordingly, I recommend this motion be de nied on all grounds ex cept the allegation of \nfailure to file notice of a ppeal hereinafter addressed. 9B. Failure to File Notice of Appeal \nPetitioner asserts that counsel was ineffective for failing to file an appeal of his amended \nsentence. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that “a criminal defense attorney’s \nfailure to file a notice of appeal when requested by his client deprives th e defendant of his Sixth \nAmendment right to the assistance of counsel, notw ithstanding that the lost appeal may not have \nhad a reasonable probability of success.” United States v. Peak , 992 F.2d 39, 42 (4th Cir. 1993). \nIn rendering this deci sion, the Court opined: \nPersons convicted in federal district courts have a ri ght to a direct \nappeal. Coppedge v. United States , 369 U.S. 438, 82 S.Ct.917, 8 \nL.E.2d 21 (1962). In addition, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel extends to the direct appeal, Douglas v. California\n, 372 \nU.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 917, 8 L.Ed.2d 811 (1963), and it obligates the \nattorney to file the appeal and id entify possible issues for the court \neven if, in the attorney’s opinion, those issues are not meritorious. \nAnders v. California , 386 U.S.738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 \n(1967). \nId. at 41. \nFurther, in Roe v. Flores-Ortega , 528 U.S. 470 (2000), the United States Supreme Court \nrecognized that “[i]f counsel has consulted wi th the defendant, the question of deficient \nperformance is easily answered : Counsel performs in a prof essionally unreasonable manner only \nby failing to follow the defendant’s express instru ctions with respect to an appeal.” Flores-\nOrtega , at 478. \nIn this case, petitioner asserts that he tried to appeal the e rrors made at his sentencing, but \nthat counsel failed to respond to his requests. Th erefore, petitioner asse rts counsel was per se \nineffective for failing to file a notice of appeal as instructed. The Government agrees that \ncounsel’s failure to file a noti ce of appeal when requested to do so is per se ineffective \nassistance. The Government further states that based upon the affidavit of the petitioner alleging \nthat he requested that an appeal be filed, a genuine issue of mate rial fact exists concerning the 10effective assistance of counsel. The Government asserts that an ev identiary hearing is \nappropriate on this issue. \nAccordingly, because the pe titioner’s motion and the Government’s response establish \nthat there is a genuine issue of material fact, I find that an ev identiary hearing is necessary to \ndetermine whether petitioner requested his attorney file an appeal and whether counsel ignored \nor refused such instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (providing in pertinent part that “[u]nless the \nmotion and the files and records of the case conclu sively show that the prisoner is entitled to no \nrelief, the court shall cause notice thereof to be served upon the United States attorney, grant a \nprompt hearing thereon, determine the issues and make findings of fact and conclusions of law \nwith respect thereto.”); see al so United States v. Witherspoon , 231 F.3d 923 (4th Cir. 2000). \nAn evidentiary hearing, solely on the issue of whether petitioner instructed his counsel to \nfile an appeal shall be held at 10 am, Septem ber 6, 2007, in the United States Magistrate Judge \nCourtroom, Room 433, 4th Floor, U.S. Courthouse, Wheeling, West Virginia. \nPetitioner shall appear by telephone from his place of incarceration. Any other party, \ncounsel or witness who resides or whose prin cipal office is more than 40 miles from the \nWheeling point of court may appear by telephone. \nBrendan S. Leary, Esq. is appointed to repres ent petitioner at the evidentiary hearing. \nIV. RECOMMENDATION \nBased upon a review of the record, the unders igned recommends that the petitioner’s \n§2255 motion be denied and dismissed from the docket because petitioner knowingly, \nintelligently, and voluntarily waived the right to collaterally attack the sentence with the \nexception of an evidentiary hearing to determine wh ether petitioner requested his attorney to file \nan appeal and whether counsel i gnored or refused instructions. 11Within ten (10) days after being served with a copy of this report and recommendation, \nany party may file with the Clerk of Court writ ten objections identifyi ng those portions of the \nrecommendation to which objection is made and the basis for such objections. A copy of any \nobjections shall also be submitted to the Honorable Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., United States District \nJudge. Failure to timely file objections to this r ecommendation will result in waiver of the right \nto appeal from a judgment of this Cour t based upon such recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § \n636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985): \nUnited States v. Schronce , 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied , 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). \nThe Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Report and Recommendation to the pro se \nplaintiff and counsel of record, as applicable. \nDATED: July 9, 2007 \n ______/s/ James. E. Seibert\n________ \n J A M E S E . S E I B E R T \n UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE \n \n \n \n \n \n \n " }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "FDTYXYUFBYWZS4D6AXVHXVZMDTSVAQO3.pdf", "text": "" }

[ -0.11883839964866638, 0.04829868674278259, -0.0025480559561401606, -0.011011209338903427, 0.05195074528455734, 0.010291832499206066, 0.1154332384467125, 0.0007007909007370472, -0.08592535555362701, -0.07065396010875702, 0.0013317164266481996, -0.035472381860017776, 0.018434155732393265, -0.006737178191542625, 0.024402987211942673, -0.029503243044018745, -0.058138374239206314, -0.05043954402208328, -0.020765526220202446, 0.029036032035946846, -0.06367600709199905, 0.024029914289712906, 0.0262432973831892, -0.006037362851202488, -0.011076544411480427, -0.0014006864512339234, -0.018619801849126816, 0.03277004510164261, 0.0028860096354037523, -0.05694391578435898, -0.04394163936376572, 0.025414075702428818, 0.08790954202413559, -0.02499123103916645, -0.03668315336108208, 0.0062413448467850685, -0.06646791845560074, -0.0671444833278656, 0.020564241334795952, 0.04238877445459366, 0.021880215033888817, -0.04288247600197792, -0.03437700495123863, 0.06146686151623726, 0.0656372681260109, -0.0785202905535698, 0.029487011954188347, 0.010798297822475433, 0.06332410126924515, -0.04508465901017189, -0.01823394186794758, -0.027721041813492775, -0.0036737609189003706, -0.03659451752901077, 0.054250262677669525, -0.02085655927658081, 0.015034922398626804, -0.060095224529504776, 0.016393909230828285, -0.03323858231306076, 0.01750349812209606, -0.0005952207720838487, -0.16348379850387573, 0.08492093533277512, -0.07583844661712646, 0.0161097701638937, 0.048382941633462906, -0.007598146330565214, -0.024985475465655327, 0.05949747934937477, 0.0658901110291481, -0.03513742983341217, 0.0008843158720992506, -0.11567969620227814, 0.049390342086553574, 0.03360460326075554, 0.055154237896203995, 0.026383694261312485, 0.053694359958171844, 0.038932498544454575, 0.0004393816343508661, 0.0180604699999094, -0.09288253635168076, -0.004073987249284983, -0.0008234609267674387, -0.04883106052875519, -0.006677441764622927, -0.023541681468486786, -0.03813307359814644, 0.05245159938931465, -0.042493823915719986, -0.055899728089571, 0.08681583404541016, -0.04896170645952225, -0.08339672535657883, -0.0457635223865509, 0.029042238369584084, 0.03465776517987251, -0.08649188280105591, 0.4062184691429138, 0.03594949096441269, 0.018697189167141914, 0.0979783833026886, -0.007865204475820065, 0.023714108392596245, -0.05756505951285362, -0.06109985336661339, -0.006620500702410936, 0.007060033269226551, 0.021669859066605568, -0.024405108764767647, -0.033514637500047684, 0.00025015627034008503, 0.03170765936374664, 0.04407161846756935, 0.09463243186473846, -0.035580113530159, -0.0045343064703047276, 0.043714847415685654, 0.00020504710846580565, -0.002858717693015933, -0.024884076789021492, 0.0037606365513056517, 0.014041258953511715, 0.07781578600406647, -0.1323145031929016, 0.0068764761090278625, -7.2201250750405e-33, 0.007334581576287746, 0.002726183971390128, 0.012147537432610989, -0.002440247917547822, 0.027932560071349144, 0.03927065059542656, 0.003743888111785054, -0.04643532633781433, -0.014492551796138287, 0.05360198765993118, 0.006590632256120443, 0.03664784133434296, -0.023135676980018616, 0.03275369852781296, 0.07811082899570465, 0.009627518244087696, 0.007964123040437698, 0.0028742437716573477, -0.0018807238666340709, 0.004691542126238346, -0.012402275577187538, -0.0008041393011808395, -0.023038707673549652, 0.04297299310564995, -0.028259985148906708, -0.06694644689559937, 0.038539037108421326, -0.07085712999105453, 0.020109260454773903, 0.001460324041545391, 0.0014639950823038816, 0.049912355840206146, -0.02594558522105217, 0.0008223677286878228, -0.03757276013493538, -0.028740663081407547, 0.03337514027953148, -0.07462829351425171, -0.035983964800834656, 0.025680823251605034, -0.050139084458351135, 0.010837196372449398, -0.04243791848421097, -0.002668545348569751, -0.004916265141218901, 0.16647927463054657, -0.0011541391722857952, -0.004960660357028246, -0.06482207775115967, 0.06976216286420822, -0.0028182310052216053, -0.02132517658174038, -0.11613703519105911, 0.04333868995308876, -0.0033509607892483473, -0.020106570795178413, 0.016554009169340134, -0.043971188366413116, 0.020619438961148262, -0.009089959785342216, 0.009713641367852688, 0.039391469210386276, -0.012487754225730896, 0.009350251406431198, -0.08647788316011429, -0.04851773753762245, 0.02447775937616825, -0.008494960144162178, 0.023063570261001587, -0.012638214975595474, -0.05100997909903526, 0.03675990551710129, 0.03771744668483734, 0.030916057527065277, -0.028798431158065796, -0.01926880143582821, -0.019831717014312744, 0.03583517670631409, 0.08063048869371414, 0.00649732630699873, 0.03545527532696724, -0.041958946734666824, 0.006693818140774965, -0.024078864604234695, 0.09502369910478592, 0.054634999483823776, 0.004220988135784864, -0.05180729925632477, 0.01021517813205719, -0.041098661720752716, -0.03574559465050697, 0.06131820008158684, -0.0030944310128688812, 0.08796171098947525, 0.006000818684697151, 4.4925641867161134e-33, -0.07716735452413559, 0.01899317093193531, -0.03573813661932945, 0.0887979194521904, -0.01755509153008461, -0.0027626880910247564, 0.037273939698934555, 0.09013677388429642, -0.09250447154045105, 0.0680299699306488, 0.022390201687812805, -0.045089662075042725, 0.030878892168402672, 0.044495198875665665, -0.005799654871225357, 0.03523358702659607, 0.06968843936920166, -0.004063474480062723, -0.028155116364359856, -0.03572935611009598, -0.030507177114486694, -0.03237851336598396, -0.0024998304434120655, 0.034929435700178146, -0.04148077219724655, 0.030205287039279938, 0.04858911409974098, 0.0632987916469574, -0.021693143993616104, 0.036800533533096313, 0.03896567225456238, -0.023581488057971, -0.05063262954354286, -0.05820295587182045, 0.04826247692108154, 0.08404397964477539, 0.03678114339709282, -0.0007768925279378891, 0.024848245084285736, -0.05051735043525696, 0.039668887853622437, -0.010082785040140152, 0.002244437113404274, 0.11697717010974884, -0.021961307153105736, -0.005805923603475094, -0.048092879354953766, 0.003788944333791733, 0.035172659903764725, 0.07729728519916534, -0.09319712221622467, -0.011992926709353924, -0.021968109533190727, 0.04129430651664734, -0.022958293557167053, 0.004160518292337656, -0.0432187058031559, 0.0702132061123848, -0.01905948668718338, 0.0004752702370751649, 0.005480603780597448, 0.026761434972286224, -0.033612821251153946, 0.01346849836409092, -0.022746674716472626, 0.03873894736170769, -0.024523282423615456, -0.03632815554738045, -0.0017924589337781072, -0.052569907158613205, 0.006689464673399925, -0.025846485048532486, -0.1348353624343872, 0.0011394252069294453, -0.047169335186481476, -0.05347497761249542, -0.018427148461341858, -0.007304163184016943, -0.009657083079218864, -0.037726134061813354, -0.033999841660261154, 0.01841733604669571, -0.008003143593668938, -0.005512353032827377, -0.03353199362754822, -0.0201805979013443, 0.021665804088115692, 0.01075822301208973, -0.05747472122311592, 0.01969684660434723, -0.007240809965878725, 0.023037107661366463, 0.12023406475782394, 0.0032419958151876926, 0.010150063782930374, -1.3403668397415913e-8, -0.046724583953619, 0.04062063992023468, -0.05561641603708267, -0.0018853341462090611, 0.056323979049921036, 0.049638908356428146, -0.04154156893491745, 0.0325038842856884, 0.02574923262000084, -0.018780937418341637, 0.06920813769102097, 0.02598794549703598, -0.02782331220805645, 0.05757509544491768, 0.09128093719482422, -0.01532574463635683, -0.10472093522548676, -0.027585938572883606, -0.016222817823290825, -0.035399287939071655, -0.010461363941431046, -0.013999390415847301, -0.0002939800324384123, -0.08362972736358643, 0.007932317443192005, 0.006960071157664061, -0.04422977939248085, 0.07475824654102325, 0.07440952211618423, -0.04058071970939636, -0.0018266832921653986, 0.01985001191496849, 0.014382191933691502, 0.020585300400853157, 0.02213379554450512, -0.06437048316001892, -0.06369856745004654, 0.01613914780318737, 0.009907381609082222, -0.0055595203302800655, -0.05467313155531883, -0.0233115516602993, 0.07046928256750107, 0.006468005012720823, -0.047700025141239166, -0.0036470729392021894, 0.007837599143385887, -0.004974569659680128, -0.01241857185959816, -0.07781214267015457, -0.0009409073390997946, -0.008002524264156818, 0.006034235469996929, 0.08434933423995972, 0.10730371624231339, 0.011427774094045162, 0.013366665691137314, -0.012747352942824364, 0.061454374343156815, 0.03564131259918213, 0.1587459295988083, 0.12640950083732605, 0.04654904082417488, -0.015717294067144394 ]

{ "pdf_file": "TZSZSGZVI7P44AUKHWEPGY3OVXOFWVPW.pdf", "text": "" }

[ 0.04403793066740036, -0.035362932831048965, -0.02568967267870903, -0.021015703678131104, 0.05752408131957054, -0.02842414192855358, 0.03832388296723366, -0.06270327419042587, 0.00867562647908926, 0.05492455139756203, 0.009979584254324436, 0.06634221971035004, 0.022666487842798233, 0.028642212972044945, 0.023850450292229652, -0.010076587088406086, -0.008612282574176788, -0.06409119814634323, -0.09834542870521545, 0.011164391413331032, 0.03835034370422363, -0.0958278700709343, 0.007825641892850399, -0.030365150421857834, -0.0025106417015194893, 0.011523246765136719, 0.03776806965470314, -0.032333869487047195, -0.03698040544986725, 0.026087692007422447, 0.007865840569138527, 0.027589110657572746, -0.0454276017844677, 0.04084271192550659, 0.032517652958631516, 0.04358797147870064, 0.00278963940218091, -0.0597185455262661, 0.0045742131769657135, -0.007706762757152319, 0.028870325535535812, -0.020582232624292374, 0.03749724105000496, 0.04048975557088852, -0.011139947921037674, -0.005085052456706762, -0.02225717157125473, -0.0066446904093027115, -0.039661016315221786, 0.06963550299406052, -0.016897547990083694, 0.05370384827256203, 0.06379294395446777, -0.03191602975130081, 0.011760907247662544, -0.048023659735918045, 0.005558164324611425, -0.009950610809028149, -0.04516458138823509, -0.060431815683841705, 0.0035962089896202087, -0.11960410326719284, 0.03441571071743965, -0.04894602298736572, -0.09318643808364868, -0.0009248883579857647, -0.008715075440704823, -0.02337227202951908, 0.04942818731069565, -0.028675757348537445, -0.07407592236995697, 0.036845628172159195, -0.13433876633644104, 0.03697685897350311, -0.020424505695700645, -0.0930253192782402, 0.08613988012075424, 0.021188031882047653, 0.022157298400998116, 0.00603557750582695, 0.05767425522208214, -0.028936689719557762, 0.025097446516156197, 0.014829380437731743, 0.053213417530059814, -0.004812524188309908, -0.10088907927274704, 0.03764960169792175, 0.012243743985891342, 0.03660023212432861, 0.01965232752263546, -0.04531122371554375, 0.07023454457521439, -0.01153556164354086, 0.04768562689423561, 0.0050977482460439205, -0.006285406649112701, 0.003910570405423641, -0.05285013094544411, 0.01246996596455574, 0.08001025021076202, -0.04011952504515648, -0.07865991443395615, 0.09039874374866486, -0.03594822436571121, 0.02727220579981804, -0.00796603038907051, -0.021376468241214752, -0.025586741045117378, 0.051946934312582016, -0.0065807620994746685, 0.014511024579405785, 0.06564556062221527, -0.0220913328230381, -0.034058015793561935, -0.07478570193052292, 0.02905474789440632, 0.007657937705516815, 0.04571116715669632, 0.007233800366520882, 0.056202493607997894, 0.09122203290462494, 0.016018187627196312, -0.10168761014938354, -0.039273452013731, -0.04860689118504524, -0.09169800579547882, 1.1006452990466553e-33, -0.011882411316037178, 0.1057853028178215, -0.015240689739584923, -0.10627668350934982, -0.07547665387392044, -0.057598333805799484, -0.018008500337600708, 0.042263105511665344, 0.021323468536138535, -0.0601806640625, 0.03327523171901703, -0.03496331721544266, 0.07295162230730057, 0.06624741852283478, -0.05745160952210426, 0.0319850780069828, 0.054519522935152054, 0.08917790651321411, 0.06045285239815712, 0.03814394026994705, 0.07821591943502426, -0.18073126673698425, 0.05466105416417122, 0.08471633493900299, 0.07367507368326187, -0.09076185524463654, 0.0005736699094995856, 0.06862754374742508, -0.03421404957771301, 0.0037585552781820297, -0.07865740358829498, 0.059486184269189835, 0.06103327497839928, -0.03315860033035278, 0.09451387822628021, 0.014681171625852585, 0.0016349111683666706, 0.09626253694295883, 0.00781470350921154, -0.04381217807531357, -0.03808283805847168, 0.05214471369981766, 0.004860398359596729, 0.0970771387219429, 0.08668062835931778, 0.03606195002794266, -0.051348380744457245, 0.049194395542144775, -0.058022771030664444, 0.026357514783740044, 0.01849580556154251, 0.03471704572439194, -0.05572124198079109, -0.044469572603702545, -0.07777543365955353, 0.001372397062368691, -0.029718954116106033, 0.03457960858941078, -0.04582405835390091, 0.04953710734844208, -0.005271694157272577, 0.0017279274761676788, -0.06340320408344269, 0.05615612491965294, -0.06958695501089096, 0.020477617159485817, -0.05786130577325821, 0.05470065400004387, -0.06709440797567368, 0.05706091597676277, 0.03748468682169914, 0.07354800403118134, 0.016231322661042213, -0.009765340015292168, -0.003952621482312679, 0.007273508235812187, 0.07741542905569077, 0.04632258042693138, 0.07822930812835693, -0.07218895852565765, -0.0476519912481308, 0.004993090406060219, 0.05541405454277992, -0.008431097492575645, -0.10795735567808151, -0.02739129401743412, 0.012518642470240593, -0.015376879833638668, -0.00511122727766633, -0.07444518059492111, 0.057450369000434875, -0.016224851831793785, 0.03942083194851875, 0.02660525217652321, 0.018356867134571075, -2.70316662547994e-33, 0.006682293489575386, 0.016846850514411926, 0.014149940572679043, -0.035150833427906036, 0.010101111605763435, 0.02949688583612442, 0.0926339328289032, 0.13205598294734955, 0.035183124244213104, -0.06634972989559174, -0.03313373029232025, -0.0037382803857326508, 0.07746146619319916, 0.05140449106693268, -0.04051652178168297, 0.0015914828982204199, 0.061766866594552994, 0.005482408218085766, 0.06936797499656677, -0.010483117774128914, 0.05844681337475777, -0.02472132071852684, -0.03816152364015579, -0.044296085834503174, 0.013034727424383163, -0.044306278228759766, -0.026552140712738037, -0.08136162906885147, -0.009018400683999062, -0.03338096663355827, 0.0599728561937809, 0.010024024173617363, -0.098982073366642, 0.06807845830917358, -0.00806526280939579, 0.08758039027452469, -0.029489202424883842, 0.021341776475310326, -0.020735522732138634, 0.05529646947979927, 0.0078346012160182, -0.04846103861927986, -0.035286709666252136, 0.04474837705492973, -0.14304488897323608, 0.09996972978115082, 0.029371127486228943, 0.04076960310339928, -0.08985542505979538, -0.14049966633319855, -0.049683861434459686, 0.014134608209133148, -0.00932982936501503, 0.04472727328538895, -0.00039721664506942034, 0.00842286553233862, -0.0649050697684288, -0.006478068884462118, 0.023710738867521286, 0.02184286154806614, -0.05260470137000084, 0.05244520679116249, 0.01851428858935833, -0.01176324114203453, -0.0535433329641819, -0.08619824051856995, 0.03730843961238861, 0.027610497549176216, 0.09863239526748657, 0.045396219938993454, 0.045440636575222015, 0.030965834856033325, -0.0801175981760025, -0.025191325694322586, 0.03753715381026268, -0.011457418091595173, 0.011846018955111504, -0.08147165924310684, -0.051993709057569504, 0.04727083817124367, -0.0346849262714386, 0.05775371566414833, -0.08456435054540634, 0.008982663974165916, 0.09910119324922562, 0.02761189639568329, 0.019126035273075104, 0.0039841169491410255, -0.01498500443994999, 0.04201639071106911, -0.05797731503844261, -0.0504259318113327, -0.04485684633255005, 0.01784626394510269, -0.052120938897132874, -4.8809983610453855e-8, 0.016486121341586113, -0.018013879656791687, -0.0637873113155365, -0.025726385414600372, -0.022279467433691025, -0.0023671030066907406, -0.012700824998319149, 0.0004349336086306721, -0.009982654824852943, -0.038938846439123154, 0.04424995556473732, 0.005717054009437561, -0.03987348452210426, -0.053254302591085434, 0.001768065500073135, 0.03523166477680206, 0.046283066272735596, 0.04882168769836426, 0.02402275614440441, -0.007256668526679277, -0.07393619418144226, 0.0049378713592886925, -0.05897172912955284, -0.025449976325035095, 0.01683720387518406, 0.020403889939188957, -0.04199133440852165, -0.025374235585331917, 0.04335886985063553, 0.04228104650974274, -0.06814959645271301, -0.021370571106672287, -0.04412117227911949, -0.030999476090073586, -0.035287100821733475, -0.02981441654264927, -0.060568809509277344, -0.1053481474518776, 0.04604602977633476, -0.029173430055379868, 0.016548626124858856, 0.08356017619371414, 0.00905001349747181, 0.04992176592350006, -0.03276735544204712, -0.12315890192985535, -0.03734365105628967, -0.08450096100568771, 0.014930135570466518, 0.01509371493011713, -0.035447102040052414, -0.07977575063705444, -0.025516686961054802, 0.07794681191444397, 0.08485839515924454, 0.08128972351551056, -0.06520946323871613, -0.0337468720972538, 0.03852538391947746, 0.076506108045578, 0.058331314474344254, -0.012929555959999561, 0.01863851398229599, -0.0015113023109734058 ]

{ "pdf_file": "UETFHQQCDHQCJRPJIH64RZ23U65GG7ZE.pdf", "text": "Of Tourists And Terrorists;<BR>U.S. Visa Policy Irks Israelis\n \n \nOf Tourists And Terrorists; U.S. Visa Policy Irks Israelis\n \nJuly 22, 2003 \n \nThomas Frank\n \nNewsweek (New York)\n \nWashington - The government's effort to prevent terrorists from entering the United States is\nprompting an unlikely protest from a staunch ally - Israel. \nThe dispute, which Israeli officials will raise with the Bush administration today, centers on a\nnew policy requiring U.S. consulates to interview many more foreigners before letting them visit\nthe United States. \nMillions of travelers now must go to U.S. consulates weeks or months before their trip to seek a\nvisa previously available by mail. The policy, implemented over recent months, becomes official\nAug. 1. \nIsrael might find the policy tolerable if it were applied evenly. But it is not. Nationals from 27\ncountries face no interviews or background checks for visits up to 90 days because the United\nStates exempts them from all visa requirements. Longer-term visitors need a visa, and\neveryone faces a quick review at a U.S. port of entry. \nThe visa-waiver countries include the United States' strongest allies and trading partners such\nas Britain, Germany and France - but not Israel, which exceeds the annual allotment of rejected\nvisas. \nAs increased scrutiny of U.S.-bound Israelis delays travel, Israeli Ambassador Danny Ayalon is\nlobbying to have Israel waived from visa requirements. Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom\nhas discussed the issue with Secretary of State Colin Powell and is expected to raise it with\nHomeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge today in Washington. \nBut their efforts collide with the post-Sept. 11 caution on admitting visitors and a recognition that\n 1 / 2 Of Tourists And Terrorists;<BR>U.S. Visa Policy Irks Israelis\nabout 1 million of the 6 million Israelis are Arabs, who are likely to draw more scrutiny. Israeli\nJews also draw scrutiny from increasingly watchful U.S. consular officers if they were born in\ncountries such as Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Iran - facts noted on Israeli passports. \n\"Nobody wants to be the visa officer who lets a terrorist into the country,\" said a congressional\naide close to the issue, recalling the outcry after revelations that all the Sept. 11 hijackers had\nbeen given visas by U.S. consulates. \"It's a complicated issue. We're working with the State\nDepartment and trying to deal with it. But it's going to be difficult.\" \nThe State Department waives visas only for stable, friendly countries whose citizens are\nconsidered unlikely to cause harm or to overstay short-term visas and become illegal\nimmigrants. A waiver is granted when less than 3 percent of a country's annual visa applicants\nare rejected. Israel exceeds that rate. \nFor Israel, requiring visas of its roughly 300,000 annual visitors to the United States is\nanomalous to its own fight against terrorism and its close ties to the United States. \"Does\nanyone really think an Israeli national is going to be involved in terrorist attacks?\" said Mark\nRegev, an Israeli Embassy spokesman. \"We think a common-sense approach to Israelis is\ncalled for.\" \nSome in Congress are echoing that view. \"Many Israelis have felt it to be insulting,\" said Rep.\nJan Schakowsky, a Democrat whose suburban Chicago district includes many Jews. \nRep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said at a hearing July 10 that requiring visas of Israelis was\n\"discrimination against Israel.\" Waxman said an Israeli woman who had been visiting the United\nStates regularly over the last 20 years recently faced such a long delay in getting a visa for her\nlatest visit that \"she missed the birth of a grandchild.\" \nBusiness, academic and travel organizations, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say\nthe additional interviews will hurt the economy by keeping visitors away. They want a\npostponement of the new interview policy and a substantial increase in the number of consular\nofficers. Sixty percent of the 28 million visitors to the United States last year required visas\nincluding nationals of key trading partners South Korea and India. \nMeanwhile, Poland is trying to become a visa-waiver country. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist\n(R-Tenn.), calling the country a \"loyal ally,\" will ask Congress to waive visas for Poland. The\nmeasure is likely to fail, but will launch a long-term campaign. \nBut Janice Jacobs, the State Department official in charge of visa services, acknowledged that\nconsular offices with large numbers of visa applicants \"will have a tougher time coming into\ncompliance with the [interview] policy.\" \n 2 / 2" }

[ -0.07103182375431061, -0.04237714409828186, -0.03016284853219986, 0.005287719424813986, -0.11398828029632568, 0.036470942199230194, 0.01091168262064457, 0.02420957200229168, 0.025507815182209015, -0.01499007549136877, -0.046400800347328186, -0.08093687146902084, -0.03984162211418152, -0.026961712166666985, 0.021200431510806084, -0.008220870979130268, 0.04719116538763046, 0.01312210876494646, 0.04293463006615639, -0.013748908415436745, 0.07065512984991074, 0.004421102348715067, -0.044121358543634415, -0.1508045494556427, -0.05328948050737381, 0.02370164915919304, -0.12857618927955627, 0.04671492800116539, -0.022873323410749435, 0.03759479895234108, 0.06113218888640404, 0.06886214017868042, 0.12039020657539368, -0.048672158271074295, 0.08464134484529495, 0.0032970549073070288, -0.07681823521852493, 0.06149540841579437, -0.002671349560841918, 0.0013370743254199624, -0.08607422560453415, 0.07020201534032822, 0.039352450519800186, 0.0959211066365242, -0.06065256521105766, 0.012165174819529057, -0.05818294361233711, -0.04989819601178169, 0.0037872539833188057, -0.05765388160943985, -0.005819054786115885, 0.010555637069046497, -0.005216925870627165, 0.10125353187322617, -0.04299164190888405, -0.014113390818238258, 0.01051938347518444, -0.00046827064943499863, -0.03687230870127678, 0.027203934267163277, 0.056814782321453094, 0.03324102237820625, -0.029067793861031532, 0.011726679280400276, -0.010089961811900139, 0.09128191322088242, -0.040142711251974106, -0.04712001979351044, 0.040116310119628906, -0.04476204887032509, -0.07111576199531555, 0.04583249241113663, -0.030994173139333725, 0.012685420922935009, 0.028080681338906288, -0.025055089965462685, 0.024725480005145073, 0.034180860966444016, 0.10977538675069809, -0.02087116613984108, -0.010342558845877647, -0.030455823987722397, -0.037976715713739395, 0.11184509843587875, -0.05859444662928581, 0.020680049434304237, -0.05881606787443161, -0.014736123383045197, 0.02205939032137394, -0.00032630664645694196, 0.0816582590341568, 0.0841456726193428, -0.02997918799519539, -0.13831418752670288, 0.01803545281291008, -0.037530601024627686, -0.024791806936264038, 0.06958615779876709, -0.008816023357212543, 0.03596482425928116, -0.00581330107524991, -0.02893315628170967, -0.09036576747894287, -0.006080125458538532, 0.06291704624891281, -0.008656350895762444, -0.023806586861610413, 0.014444458298385143, -0.023397324606776237, 0.02822919934988022, 0.05888405069708824, 0.0056613897904753685, -0.025099221616983414, -0.0017103918362408876, -0.02506028674542904, 0.07159336656332016, -0.014735588803887367, 0.03325090557336807, 0.07019904255867004, 0.052921731024980545, -0.06486978381872177, -0.031313877552747726, -0.12410196661949158, 0.0041766841895878315, -0.04960602521896362, -0.09124065190553665, -0.012687519192695618, 8.942706251678989e-33, 0.005212794523686171, 0.005416196305304766, 0.03791990503668785, -0.053645286709070206, 0.07164376974105835, -0.00719750439748168, 0.07937333732843399, 0.028778113424777985, 0.008561866357922554, 0.013152813538908958, -0.07544524222612381, -0.05918734148144722, 0.03399629890918732, -0.023108284920454025, -0.08689815551042557, 0.0880156010389328, 0.012538567185401917, 0.023282479494810104, -0.0896342322230339, -0.0001805929932743311, 0.07617827504873276, -0.027988916262984276, -0.016397625207901, 0.035466380417346954, 0.01897498592734337, 0.07387346029281616, -0.024797692894935608, 0.012590060010552406, 0.021784156560897827, -0.020392728969454765, -0.09971371293067932, 0.021586326882243156, 0.0846853256225586, -0.008402119390666485, 0.06882880628108978, 0.019021591171622276, 0.09935485571622849, -0.010419602505862713, -0.08835624158382416, -0.017335467040538788, 0.03667300567030907, 0.08996781706809998, 0.01507542748004198, 0.04036468639969826, 0.08255943655967712, -0.012521357275545597, 0.05643686652183533, 0.04133965075016022, 0.13376331329345703, 0.025278139859437943, -0.08276458829641342, 0.04863555729389191, -0.0657874271273613, 0.032988112419843674, -0.05237636715173721, 0.01719074510037899, -0.024990132078528404, 0.02944386564195156, 0.013786105439066887, 0.028850499540567398, -0.014906125143170357, 0.0011226803762838244, -0.060803014785051346, 0.02037160098552704, 0.012086707167327404, -0.1068573072552681, -0.0003509331145323813, -0.07577093690633774, 0.019818659871816635, 0.01994318515062332, -0.03451273590326309, 0.0022797256242483854, 0.0134894335642457, -0.0020675898995250463, -0.05769585818052292, 0.04361964762210846, 0.046048786491155624, 0.039331018924713135, -0.039300013333559036, -0.01690926030278206, 0.057655591517686844, -0.01574457623064518, -0.037438564002513885, 0.023083146661520004, 0.03816429153084755, 0.0419546514749527, 0.05813351646065712, -0.03796781226992607, -0.03252513334155083, 0.06343423575162888, 0.005480581428855658, -0.01904037781059742, 0.05047541484236717, 0.0073106600902974606, -0.048644453287124634, -9.15948651175382e-33, -0.005787495523691177, -0.0796281099319458, -0.007648023311048746, -0.006097211968153715, 0.022713840007781982, 0.07168208062648773, 0.022385934367775917, -0.053227007389068604, 0.04597194492816925, -0.03459962084889412, -0.024878723546862602, 0.06164403632283211, 0.07273215055465698, -0.07945682108402252, -0.01343403197824955, 0.07908475399017334, -0.04285457357764244, 0.06717080622911453, -0.11318055540323257, 0.03371753543615341, 0.019670048728585243, 0.10257109999656677, -0.07700378447771072, 0.05321212857961655, 0.01903320848941803, 0.000683970341924578, -0.01260650809854269, 0.031765010207891464, -0.002346963156014681, 0.07250671833753586, -0.11029311269521713, -0.05150214955210686, -0.06109954044222832, 0.10608178377151489, -0.06312203407287598, -0.04400242120027542, 0.04430593550205231, 0.036950841546058655, -0.005899655632674694, 0.1264338344335556, -0.06975486874580383, -0.013812389224767685, -0.020989272743463516, 0.04740550369024277, -0.05907775089144707, -0.01026918739080429, 0.015412935055792332, -0.007096347399055958, -0.015583538450300694, 0.021501602604985237, 0.014090933836996555, -0.07217472791671753, -0.08589340001344681, 0.0473564937710762, 0.014238991774618626, 0.045801594853401184, 0.01165752299129963, -0.017763806506991386, -0.12193149328231812, -0.018393531441688538, 0.03245491907000542, 0.06110725179314613, 0.029347794130444527, 0.010069664567708969, 0.08520424365997314, -0.06976394355297089, -0.06316758692264557, -0.032917868345975876, -0.042275168001651764, -0.05387713387608528, -0.09309997409582138, -0.07006467878818512, 0.024180280044674873, -0.046849220991134644, -0.01288516167551279, 0.02566215954720974, 0.026904068887233734, -0.01686708815395832, -0.07088395208120346, 0.09658242017030716, 0.012797427363693714, 0.07696958631277084, 0.00036665043444372714, 0.08531886339187622, -0.01317517925053835, 0.10799817740917206, 0.07658945024013519, 0.0140569182112813, 0.052646439522504807, -0.0011889660963788629, -0.09664641320705414, -0.008095387369394302, -0.0401155911386013, -0.032558538019657135, 0.018046734854578972, -4.871112935234123e-8, 0.040356431156396866, -0.05380461737513542, -0.02914426475763321, 0.03033742867410183, 0.01110345870256424, -0.012121915817260742, -0.040264930576086044, -0.010384430177509785, -0.029682457447052002, 0.016233477741479874, 0.021005956456065178, -0.0045973011292517185, -0.014960573054850101, -0.04613757133483887, -0.015284177847206593, -0.0286858007311821, 0.018680276349186897, -0.11067783832550049, -0.04370623826980591, -0.014409573748707771, -0.10562963783740997, -0.027164412662386894, 0.033703338354825974, 0.007695514243096113, -0.007731354329735041, -0.028385872021317482, -0.08665908873081207, 0.08721064031124115, -0.004166889935731888, 0.06555020064115524, -0.04754044860601425, 0.0006013576639816165, -0.04483721777796745, -0.03353015333414078, -0.007209676317870617, -0.04141053929924965, 0.031957004219293594, -0.05162377282977104, -0.0030860223341733217, 0.0034018433652818203, 0.0410396084189415, -0.02954319678246975, -0.04189729318022728, 0.06950792670249939, -0.03362909331917763, 0.024956613779067993, 0.0055483123287558556, -0.06889316439628601, 0.019022900611162186, 0.073543980717659, 0.019722845405340195, 0.0060362727381289005, -0.016684124246239662, 0.0077147516421973705, 0.015825334936380386, 0.03148818388581276, -0.04141446202993393, -0.010157891549170017, -0.001287404214963317, 0.08866104483604431, 0.04614282771945, -0.02337714098393917, 0.012348731979727745, -0.07367026060819626 ]

{ "pdf_file": "M6EE3W5HUIM2YKPPBQ4CS552OOM5UC7I.pdf", "text": "Employment Preferences\nChief Dentist, Correctional Facility\n094199-00109344-6ceca\nThis multi-level recruitment is for:\n094199-00109344-6ceca CHIEF DENTIST, CORRECTIONAL FACILITY\nLast Name\nFirst Name\nDOB Month\nDOB Day:\nLast four digits of SSN or other ID\nFirst three letters of last name at birth\nEmail Address (if willing to accept email communication)\nCheck here if this is a new email address\nMailing Address\nCity\nState\nZip Code\nCheck here if this is a new mailing address\nOnly provide the following phone numbers if it is acceptable to call\nHome Phone\nWork Phone\nAlternate Phone\nForm 631: Chief Dentist, Correctional Facility-094199-00109344-6ceca\nPage 1 Please complete the following employment preference information:\nForm 631: Chief Dentist, Correctional Facility-094199-00109344-6ceca\nPage 2 \nYou may pick one or more locations.\nSelect\nLocation \nAvenal State Prison\nCA State Prison,Sacramento\nCal Correctional Institution\nCal State Prison, San Quentin\nCal Subst Abuse Trtmnt Fac\nCalif Institution For Men\nCalif Institution For Women\nCalif Rehabilitation Center\nCalif State Prison, Corcoran\nCalif State Prison, LA County\nCalif State Prison, Solano\nCalifornia Correctional Center\nCalifornia Medical Facility\nCalifornia Mens Colony\nCalipatria State Prison\nCentinela State Prison\nCentral Calif Womens Facility\nChaderjian School\nChuckawalla Valley State Prison\nCorrection Central Region\nCorrection Northern Region\nCorrection Southern Region\nCorrection Upper Northern Reg\nCorrectional Trng Facility\nDeuel Vocational Institution\nDewitt Nelson Training Center\nEl Paso De Robles School\nFolsom State Prison\nLocation Records 1 to 28 of 50 Select\nLocation \nHeman G. Stark YCF\nHigh Desert State Prison\nIronwood State Prison\nKern Valley St Prison\nMule Creek State Prison\nNorth Kern State Prison\nNorthern Youth Center, Stkn\nO H Close School, Stockton\nPelican Bay State Prison\nPine Grove Camp - Amador\nPleasant Valley State Prison\nPreston Youth Cor Facility\nR J Donovan Corr Facility\nRichard A Mcgee Corr Trg Ctr\nSacramento\nSacramento County\nSalinas Valley State Prison\nSierra Conservation Center\nSouthern Youth CRC\nValley State Prison For Women\nVentura Youth Corr Facility\nWasco State Prison\nLocation Records 29 to 50 of 50 \nForm 631: Chief Dentist, Correctional Facility-094199-00109344-6ceca\nPage 3 Form 631: Chief Dentist, Correctional Facility-094199-00109344-6ceca\nPage 4 \nPlease select at least one item from each column to indicate conditions of employment your willing to accept:\nPermanent Full-time\nPermanent Part-time\nPermanent Intermittent\n Limited Term Full-time\n Limited Term Part-Time\n Limited Term Intermittent Form 631: Chief Dentist, Correctional Facility-094199-00109344-6ceca\nPage 5 \nAdditional Options:\nIf you are currently eligible and wish to become inactive for this recruitment, please check here\nIf you have previously inactivated yourself for this recruitment and would like to reactivate your application,\nplease check here\nIf you have never been eligible, and wish to withdraw from this recruitment, please check here\nSignature: _____________________________________________________ Date: ______________________" }

[ -0.062037765979766846, 0.0343860425055027, 0.05578039586544037, -0.02275102026760578, -0.017139030620455742, 0.02746373787522316, -0.10181564092636108, -0.04452695697546005, 0.025364499539136887, 0.025219548493623734, 0.07244082540273666, 0.0881352499127388, -0.04976939409971237, -0.002466595498844981, -0.030624588951468468, 0.04833562672138214, 0.04213383048772812, -0.01060550194233656, 0.038865189999341965, 0.010708502493798733, 0.06334489583969116, -0.021665338426828384, -0.00582902180030942, -0.012720811180770397, 0.038681142032146454, -0.026612671092152596, 0.0213057529181242, -0.07055049389600754, 0.06733257323503494, 0.020136328414082527, 0.04256175085902214, 0.048983387649059296, 0.018215669319033623, -0.02243935875594616, 0.0380878783762455, -0.015258985571563244, -0.020649414509534836, 0.0040352423675358295, 0.0014291690895333886, -0.024184677749872208, 0.017307111993432045, 0.0430951751768589, 0.015372919850051403, -0.007531485985964537, -0.011089716106653214, 0.013496091589331627, 0.04164176806807518, 0.019770506769418716, -0.0607597678899765, -0.006580942776054144, -0.0764198899269104, -0.0715600922703743, 0.009922967292368412, 0.041022613644599915, 0.0010512814624235034, -0.025505753234028816, -0.003278248244896531, 0.06080557778477669, -0.014555233530700207, 0.04786420613527298, 0.03042369708418846, -0.05774281546473503, -0.09282763302326202, -0.03220708668231964, 0.027522530406713486, 0.0009785577422007918, 0.0496785007417202, -0.06520865112543106, 0.09006784111261368, 0.04374867305159569, 0.05706004053354263, 0.01832299865782261, 0.012471410445868969, 0.035196684300899506, -0.001853958354331553, 0.0577857606112957, 0.01857285387814045, 0.01723865605890751, 0.02834550477564335, -0.12618805468082428, -0.07271164655685425, -0.06112163886427879, -0.009805071167647839, -0.04022682458162308, -0.03363417834043503, -0.07460886240005493, -0.07601897418498993, 0.10942759364843369, 0.03602999448776245, -0.024730311706662178, 0.0746898278594017, -0.10328569263219833, -0.04082900658249855, -0.05990830436348915, -0.021622031927108765, -0.06038273125886917, -0.0345027819275856, -0.006201556418091059, 0.07727650552988052, 0.04399031773209572, 0.001280171680264175, 0.0797344520688057, -0.0890611782670021, -0.020709097385406494, -0.013943604193627834, -0.00038345804205164313, -0.06563635170459747, -0.051919229328632355, 0.016695380210876465, 0.04580569639801979, 0.01424348633736372, 0.008880731649696827, 0.129398912191391, -0.012767870910465717, -0.012831873260438442, 0.06857684999704361, -0.0166772548109293, 0.05444888770580292, 0.03963232785463333, -0.03697158768773079, 0.08292005956172943, 0.043808285146951675, -0.006945342291146517, -0.04118431359529495, -0.010057921521365643, 0.07735186815261841, 0.03218816965818405, 2.576752723213313e-34, -0.01238762866705656, -0.03923765942454338, -0.05773245170712471, 0.0005508740432560444, 0.017218731343746185, 0.013615692965686321, 0.021679503843188286, -0.011035555973649025, -0.024115752428770065, -0.021830443292856216, 0.043312836438417435, -0.03654501959681511, 0.03948638215661049, -0.1319977343082428, -0.06374897062778473, -0.004950129892677069, 0.10124658048152924, 0.09794283658266068, -0.004834189545363188, -0.002716925460845232, 0.07268673181533813, -0.13946446776390076, 0.03395938128232956, 0.04224361106753349, -0.0012354102218523622, -0.046681612730026245, 0.0020046988502144814, 0.01562945917248726, -0.021620772778987885, -0.01057977881282568, 0.02002984844148159, 0.06972827762365341, 0.006096174940466881, 0.11974508315324783, 0.040090013295412064, 0.039504971355199814, 0.009443744085729122, 0.0017531982157379389, 0.10104546695947647, 0.03300749883055687, -0.022760065272450447, -0.0026562802959233522, -0.03800735995173454, -0.044434089213609695, -0.051650725305080414, -0.09062980115413666, -0.007621347904205322, -0.035128358751535416, -0.0662207305431366, 0.06947558373212814, 0.07893018424510956, -0.00005161698936717585, 0.013797127641737461, -0.10205432027578354, 0.050557173788547516, 0.08392687886953354, -0.06654675304889679, -0.05463023856282234, 0.044111836701631546, 0.03847096487879753, 0.09066031128168106, -0.007957885973155499, -0.015880342572927475, 0.061033960431814194, -0.03210315853357315, 0.06523719429969788, -0.06142740324139595, 0.0009422051953151822, 0.029355274513363838, -0.03667265549302101, 0.026290373876690865, 0.030559882521629333, -0.006875775288790464, -0.027972765266895294, 0.019199086353182793, -0.13062457740306854, 0.031695883721113205, 0.0022320360876619816, 0.027478588744997978, 0.0033336130436509848, -0.06858082860708237, -0.034568872302770615, 0.027669159695506096, 0.04437552019953728, 0.017428642138838768, -0.09754117578268051, -0.03509887307882309, -0.009659959003329277, -0.07092384248971939, -0.03787573054432869, -0.09210735559463501, -0.010673144832253456, -0.06960193067789078, 0.08740374445915222, 0.15474674105644226, -6.682465897588887e-34, -0.011484618298709393, -0.07074296474456787, 0.0036949324421584606, 0.021913787350058556, 0.03903129696846008, -0.08582296222448349, -0.0787750855088234, 0.08746980130672455, -0.023729661479592323, -0.06374182552099228, -0.06718496233224869, -0.0322323739528656, 0.023825496435165405, -0.02932604029774666, -0.08297453075647354, 0.07217134535312653, 0.08866740763187408, -0.04314432665705681, 0.02114127390086651, 0.05816563963890076, -0.011635622009634972, -0.07246097922325134, -0.08348129689693451, -0.024721592664718628, 0.022042788565158844, -0.003957066219300032, 0.07377467304468155, -0.07273075729608536, -0.005587056279182434, 0.02317708544433117, -0.06500069051980972, -0.0670938566327095, -0.08197071403265, -0.03960178419947624, 0.012112398631870747, 0.030012117698788643, 0.042003996670246124, 0.0034927567467093468, 0.008343962021172047, 0.09374848753213882, -0.025454524904489517, 0.09753797948360443, -0.02722911164164543, -0.000039101014408515766, 0.03108750469982624, 0.016185378655791283, 0.030265256762504578, 0.0642668753862381, 0.03069850616157055, -0.013962939381599426, 0.0006472885725088418, 0.05616111308336258, 0.07335737347602844, -0.05745084583759308, 0.008747533895075321, -0.015289870090782642, 0.029551737010478973, -0.01980018988251686, -0.06188204139471054, -0.00163959339261055, 0.032568011432886124, 0.033443987369537354, -0.03420542925596237, -0.003019700525328517, 0.04560663551092148, 0.037597253918647766, -0.0021806047298014164, 0.03394590690732002, 0.022155269980430603, -0.02235044538974762, -0.015876177698373795, -0.009774702601134777, -0.06480015069246292, -0.053754813969135284, 0.05847004055976868, -0.008188840933144093, 0.05706533044576645, -0.004748338833451271, -0.04278501868247986, -0.057455189526081085, -0.014378179796040058, -0.004631980322301388, 0.0022038135211914778, -0.059286266565322876, -0.00206521013751626, 0.08041708916425705, -0.043783992528915405, 0.036863986402750015, -0.0026252162642776966, 0.036262936890125275, 0.033655330538749695, -0.016898784786462784, 0.06320520490407944, 0.03235754370689392, -0.07739702612161636, -3.617903487906915e-8, -0.028905078768730164, 0.014841780997812748, 0.034934788942337036, -0.02305440790951252, 0.13748568296432495, 0.05296776443719864, 0.0038336380384862423, 0.09151937067508698, 0.009600711986422539, -0.0968642458319664, 0.056261371821165085, -0.0012750343885272741, 0.08543325215578079, -0.01943124085664749, -0.02810467965900898, -0.05980647727847099, 0.02256113663315773, -0.06955417990684509, -0.06321007013320923, 0.06890963762998581, -0.05824648588895798, -0.04597390070557594, 0.003583017038181424, -0.004447090905159712, -0.014758319593966007, -0.08466585725545883, -0.009525736793875694, 0.016557367518544197, -0.032844193279743195, 0.013876453973352909, -0.07130937278270721, 0.06513354927301407, 0.005856137722730637, 0.05025910958647728, -0.004917262587696314, -0.07071300595998764, -0.04066229611635208, 0.026278868317604065, -0.0006765744183212519, 0.09867613017559052, -0.01737075112760067, 0.06999208778142929, 0.04655912145972252, 0.05251296982169151, -0.03730812668800354, -0.07125360518693924, -0.011225038208067417, -0.0628049224615097, -0.03439004719257355, -0.006053259130567312, 0.052237316966056824, -0.003707141149789095, 0.00767615856602788, -0.03185171261429787, 0.09475953876972198, 0.13066303730010986, 0.093145951628685, 0.0009864607127383351, -0.0930083841085434, -0.03980120271444321, -0.04317957162857056, -0.04551861062645912, -0.029650934040546417, 0.06133338809013367 ]

{ "pdf_file": "ULCLOMI3UKLP64SCVDH4CHNACUNJWMNC.pdf", "text": "Discovery\nThe Court allows six months, but may extend, depending on agreement of counsel. Discovery\nmotions are referred to a Magistrate Judge. The motion cutoff can be extended before and after the\ncutoff date by stipulation of the parties; however, if the extension interferes with the trial date, it is\ngenerally not allowed. " }

[ 0.02547164261341095, -0.05559413880109787, -0.00473603093996644, 0.07494111359119415, -0.08091447502374649, 0.015135956928133965, -0.016810985282063484, 0.007839244790375233, -0.044794097542762756, -0.03053865395486355, -0.016839660704135895, -0.029228998348116875, 0.018884774297475815, -0.007691133767366409, -0.043352603912353516, 0.0011751987040042877, 0.11438451707363129, -0.022209124639630318, -0.028171682730317116, -0.08474963158369064, -0.02096567675471306, 0.043453194200992584, 0.018626347184181213, -0.045359279960393906, 0.015458760783076286, 0.0058935703709721565, -0.05534049868583679, 0.006253644824028015, -0.013538104481995106, -0.045332930982112885, -0.04583313316106796, 0.03239176794886589, 0.02820947766304016, -0.024472929537296295, 0.009742007590830326, -0.02043997496366501, 0.029763614758849144, -0.06579404324293137, 0.05988983437418938, 0.04888853803277016, 0.021388400346040726, 0.01652297005057335, 0.004701939877122641, -0.03340235725045204, -0.06196317821741104, 0.10858717560768127, -0.032727550715208054, -0.03533197566866875, 0.055197834968566895, 0.0011020090896636248, 0.01274288073182106, 0.06730100512504578, 0.060148872435092926, 0.0774756371974945, -0.04342946410179138, -0.018864311277866364, -0.004606206435710192, -0.050239648669958115, -0.004279605578631163, 0.029938576743006706, -0.05798919126391411, 0.041841309517621994, -0.006159400567412376, -0.012482582591474056, -0.02904803492128849, 0.028595643118023872, -0.10930489003658295, -0.004774153232574463, 0.003831483656540513, -0.0687328577041626, 0.01304076798260212, -0.019951704889535904, -0.08763623237609863, -0.009306899271905422, 0.032112400978803635, -0.04759139567613602, -0.000761320348829031, 0.015900354832410812, 0.03962454944849014, -0.06276209652423859, -0.0662064477801323, -0.08099568635225296, 0.07230494916439056, 0.027043962851166725, 0.0305030457675457, -0.03901195153594017, 0.00919283926486969, 0.07600745558738708, 0.0006650875438936055, -0.022352801635861397, 0.025713926181197166, 0.06337270140647888, -0.01694130152463913, -0.0294157937169075, 0.018966611474752426, 0.06279899924993515, -0.026545977219939232, 0.003014539135619998, 0.0023321155458688736, 0.026481054723262787, -0.04963710531592369, -0.000358417397364974, -0.06188015639781952, 0.0012610884150490165, -0.0016659453976899385, 0.010161043144762516, -0.002990937791764736, 0.09788647294044495, -0.09682708978652954, 0.025059670209884644, 0.12606579065322876, -0.0431566946208477, 0.022872021421790123, -0.03847922384738922, 0.05121995136141777, 0.029714690521359444, -0.061413560062646866, 0.0503232441842556, 0.044981859624385834, 0.035708777606487274, -0.0039251213893294334, 0.026781905442476273, 0.02086804062128067, 0.07199005782604218, 0.04379415884613991, 0.06726719439029694, 0.04925374314188957, 5.5267534636520076e-33, -0.013704542070627213, -0.037371162325143814, -0.028151215985417366, -0.05033949762582779, 0.010562517680227757, -0.02063758671283722, -0.04120352119207382, 0.04407913237810135, 0.08464620262384415, 0.02728973887860775, -0.08953363448381424, 0.005868903826922178, -0.019857527688145638, -0.061448339372873306, 0.03224904090166092, -0.05811339616775513, -0.02363629639148712, 0.0349038690328598, -0.07439117878675461, -0.010426411405205727, 0.012087280862033367, -0.10609021782875061, 0.00005722881178371608, 0.03116069734096527, -0.045551713556051254, -0.023183178156614304, -0.0156544242054224, 0.021930675953626633, 0.018675772473216057, 0.017353985458612442, 0.028557976707816124, -0.04199200123548508, -0.018813733011484146, 0.06528070569038391, -0.018425658345222473, -0.015550936572253704, -0.018504001200199127, 0.05360151827335358, -0.11459437757730484, 0.006234228610992432, -0.039734553545713425, -0.019811265170574188, -0.04249122366309166, -0.020126359537243843, -0.023310353979468346, 0.061820171773433685, 0.0703115314245224, -0.0049719419330358505, -0.01237501110881567, 0.023963918909430504, -0.13660025596618652, 0.030613182112574577, 0.02945888601243496, 0.0001498137426096946, -0.06991342455148697, 0.0045109405182302, 0.07025430351495743, 0.035787973552942276, -0.025330709293484688, 0.10408236086368561, -0.049182284623384476, 0.04984738305211067, -0.03847329691052437, -0.03953323885798454, -0.04432259500026703, -0.05864306166768074, 0.020339902490377426, 0.07276731729507446, 0.04147547483444214, -0.03118891455233097, 0.11836826056241989, -0.0485759936273098, 0.08661904186010361, 0.03195372223854065, 0.07637422531843185, 0.002472375752404332, 0.04868296533823013, -0.04179597645998001, -0.012035560794174671, -0.005991071928292513, -0.059245869517326355, -0.04086824506521225, -0.0004918022896163166, -0.023656629025936127, 0.09861370176076889, -0.08235307782888412, 0.021422773599624634, 0.006647695787250996, -0.06234218180179596, -0.03884061798453331, -0.042369384318590164, 0.012498289346694946, 0.0015893889358267188, 0.0593932680785656, -0.014870630577206612, -7.463814604857561e-33, 0.037937361747026443, 0.08552923798561096, 0.02824372984468937, -0.04027262702584267, 0.04892915114760399, -0.006757615599781275, 0.055142536759376526, 0.014544020406901836, 0.10447103530168533, 0.08077641576528549, 0.016219383105635643, -0.07088641077280045, 0.016234952956438065, -0.02757205441594124, 0.03703200817108154, -0.05070829391479492, 0.019467206671833992, -0.017717821523547173, -0.055247075855731964, -0.013970891013741493, -0.08746638894081116, -0.01658840849995613, -0.11113488674163818, -0.01038283295929432, -0.0023131920024752617, 0.06007954105734825, -0.07912177592515945, -0.03570523113012314, 0.00022025394719094038, 0.021250998601317406, -0.08645831048488617, -0.07781971246004105, -0.017378728836774826, 0.07136952131986618, -0.04737246409058571, -0.0046813455410301685, 0.024582289159297943, 0.04690702259540558, -0.0517372190952301, 0.0045305341482162476, 0.10507035255432129, -0.031222255900502205, 0.005867490079253912, 0.07780633121728897, 0.01685040071606636, 0.02181762456893921, -0.04331432282924652, -0.0347759909927845, -0.01632022298872471, -0.01823262684047222, -0.020061520859599113, 0.040697935968637466, -0.006803920958191156, 0.07652319222688675, 0.02591417357325554, 0.004514433443546295, 0.11480001360177994, 0.007676399778574705, -0.128266379237175, -0.05776868760585785, 0.09519262611865997, -0.013643256388604641, 0.02186790108680725, 0.09079529345035553, 0.029371611773967743, -0.053845733404159546, -0.04379422962665558, -0.11626096814870834, -0.097426638007164, 0.02697325125336647, -0.03219880536198616, -0.07633598148822784, 0.012872993014752865, -0.04231693968176842, -0.0703335851430893, -0.03193490952253342, 0.04665391147136688, 0.045563653111457825, -0.0005288273096084595, 0.004511718638241291, -0.08981252461671829, -0.06588661670684814, -0.030307620763778687, 0.0522659607231617, -0.059165697544813156, 0.018381429836153984, 0.025458354502916336, -0.07178083807229996, 0.06408193707466125, 0.0570969395339489, -0.04859268665313721, 0.0438358299434185, -0.08802168071269989, 0.03306817635893822, -0.006581146270036697, -6.052563605862815e-8, 0.03378720209002495, -0.004830452613532543, -0.027323558926582336, 0.00841275230050087, 0.15646980702877045, -0.07149510085582733, 0.045119281858205795, 0.09514165669679642, -0.14763472974300385, 0.05466372147202492, 0.02711549773812294, 0.00624820264056325, -0.06636460870504379, -0.018894502893090248, 0.029245560988783836, -0.01385239977389574, -0.010371660813689232, -0.05336546525359154, -0.01338379830121994, -0.10399402678012848, -0.008639591746032238, -0.025084467604756355, 0.005441571120172739, -0.01258870866149664, -0.06374464184045792, -0.0007249538321048021, 0.025025220587849617, -0.00790216401219368, 0.06675630062818527, -0.017288722097873688, 0.02603115141391754, -0.015358268283307552, -0.02807972952723503, -0.11861839890480042, 0.05586798116564751, 0.01780983991920948, -0.0994672179222107, 0.01570236310362816, -0.013215519487857819, 0.10026464611291885, -0.08434625715017319, -0.03722253814339638, -0.013212268240749836, 0.04286985844373703, 0.12522219121456146, 0.028165867552161217, -0.08248523622751236, 0.013286073692142963, 0.07765928655862808, -0.06217839568853378, 0.00005270406472845934, -0.11336006224155426, -0.013642268255352974, 0.019188418984413147, -0.006311460398137569, 0.08074162900447845, -0.05556835979223251, -0.08882880955934525, -0.007183334324508905, 0.039021845906972885, 0.04552807658910751, 0.009060547687113285, -0.059683460742235184, 0.004156412556767464 ]

{ "pdf_file": "V5BPYCHUXYL6NY7HNB7SZHSWT7J7W6GC.pdf", "text": "Idaho Transportation Department \n200 Highest Hour Statistics \nAt Continuous Counter Sites \n \n1998 Traffic Year \n \nSite ID: 002140 004.144 County: ADA \nLocation: #080 SH-21 Boise River Bridge, Boise (Eckert Rd. \nAxle Factor Group: 3 Growth Factor Group: 3 \nSeasonal Factor Group: 5 FHWA Functional Class: 16 \n \nAnnual \nHighest Begin \nHour Volume %AADT +Dir% Date Time \n1 797 21.2 55.7 Sat 27JUN 11:00 \n2 614 16.4 43.2 Thu 16JUL 17:00 \n3 605 16.1 43.8 Thu 12MAR 17:00 \n4 598 15.9 50.0 Fri 17JUL 17:00 \n5 598 15.9 50.0 Sun 19JUL 16:00 \n6 577 15.4 29.3 Thu 23APR 16:00 \n7 576 15.3 46.7 Tue 21JUL 17:00 \n8 566 15.1 48.8 Thu 28MAY 17:00 \n9 561 14.9 52.8 Sun 19JUL 15:00 \n10 555 14.8 53.3 Sat 27JUN 10:00 \n11 554 14.8 52.0 Sun 19JUL 17:00 \n12 549 14.6 43.2 Tue 21APR 17:00 \n13 548 14.6 43.6 Wed 10JUN 17:00 \n14 547 14.6 47.3 Tue 04AUG 17:00 \n15 547 14.6 48.6 Sat 18JUL 16:00 \n16 543 14.5 44.2 Wed 22APR 17:00 \n17 542 14.4 46.7 Tue 28JUL 17:00 \n18 541 14.4 46.8 Thu 02APR 17:00 \n19 537 14.3 51.0 Wed 29JUL 17:00 \n20 533 14.2 41.1 Mon 01JUN 17:00 \n21 533 14.2 42.4 Thu 19MAR 17:00 \n22 531 14.1 46.1 Thu 03SEP 17:00 \n23 530 14.1 43.4 Mon 20APR 17:00 \n24 529 14.1 45.2 Wed 11MAR 17:00 \n25 528 14.1 46.4 Wed 15JUL 17:00 \n26 527 14.0 43.1 Tue 28APR 17:00 \n27 524 14.0 43.1 Fri 01MAY 17:00 \n28 523 13.9 47.4 Tue 30JUN 17:00 \n29 523 13.9 46.8 Fri 14AUG 17:00 \n30 522 13.9 41.8 Mon 27JUL 17:00 \n40 514 13.7 49.0 Thu 23JUL 17:00 \n50 505 13.4 44.8 Wed 29APR 17:00 \n60 497 13.2 53.3 Sat 18JUL 17:00 \n70 489 13.0 52.8 Sat 25JUL 13:00 \n80 485 12.9 46.2 Mon 30MAR 17:00 \n90 482 12.8 47.7 Mon 20JUL 17:00 \n100 476 12.7 48.7 Wed 16SEP 17:00 \n200 429 11.4 71.3 Tue 07APR 7:00 \nA05 Creation Date/Time: 31MAR99:10:42:11 Page 1 of 1 \n " }

[ -0.21390953660011292, 0.033557791262865067, -0.000025610690499888733, -0.05899447575211525, 0.02367359958589077, 0.005736486986279488, 0.0983567163348198, 0.1259908229112625, 0.021550649777054787, 0.06065571680665016, 0.03338142856955528, 0.01684742420911789, 0.039176326245069504, 0.02608111873269081, -0.023977180942893028, 0.04245462268590927, -0.005110542755573988, -0.03536834195256233, -0.1229504942893982, 0.025049928575754166, 0.08708400279283524, -0.019573276862502098, -0.044744785875082016, 0.012439011596143246, -0.07719461619853973, 0.01173483021557331, 0.01434970460832119, -0.006784458179026842, 0.06095593050122261, -0.02962099388241768, 0.03882875293493271, 0.1395864337682724, 0.0031230866443365812, -0.010126914829015732, 0.09958117455244064, -0.030036093667149544, -0.021814562380313873, -0.034617673605680466, -0.013905170373618603, 0.0021932420786470175, 0.04572561755776405, -0.03728628158569336, -0.03153744712471962, 0.022802922874689102, 0.030539480969309807, 0.05792873352766037, 0.03153293579816818, 0.01618555746972561, -0.10210708528757095, 0.02898283302783966, -0.05236215516924858, 0.02717306837439537, -0.04404572397470474, 0.008932881988584995, -0.00903032161295414, -0.05048222467303276, -0.06080307438969612, -0.051199574023485184, 0.014002500101923943, -0.004600056912750006, 0.05818977206945419, -0.06237373501062393, -0.03289029747247696, 0.001371081918478012, 0.08681392669677734, -0.00194944953545928, -0.005482381675392389, -0.0698138028383255, -0.021390993148088455, 0.04015658423304558, 0.07312722504138947, 0.004099518526345491, -0.09750111401081085, 0.04648363217711449, 0.0055348533205688, 0.05092582851648331, 0.042586375027894974, 0.03175200894474983, 0.022956524044275284, -0.12656573951244354, 0.02757994271814823, -0.015957392752170563, 0.0011457785731181502, -0.08233688026666641, 0.006664643529802561, -0.05154051259160042, -0.048351407051086426, -0.04065936431288719, 0.07669492065906525, -0.009763026610016823, 0.10848177224397659, -0.03612009063363075, -0.03671788424253464, -0.0022602577228099108, 0.07470987737178802, -0.020366741344332695, -0.019640784710645676, 0.05009637773036957, 0.018976982682943344, 0.039150942116975784, 0.07743588089942932, 0.04163825884461403, -0.07385086268186569, -0.052614159882068634, -0.043646495789289474, -0.053154654800891876, 0.023108620196580887, -0.037807077169418335, 0.05423782020807266, -0.002658647717908025, -0.06388738006353378, 0.004380035679787397, 0.015450351871550083, -0.030858589336276054, -0.013163960538804531, -0.014804482460021973, -0.004363548010587692, 0.057524584233760834, 0.08897774666547775, -0.0887143686413765, 0.043430864810943604, 0.09263461828231812, -0.07040849328041077, -0.02126360684633255, -0.040106307715177536, 0.0051119220443069935, -0.0355902835726738, 1.5488187200791747e-32, -0.06921188533306122, 0.05710980296134949, 0.02174275368452072, -0.04920505732297897, 0.014883850701153278, -0.032324086874723434, -0.04147598519921303, -0.002691693836823106, -0.012822686694562435, -0.021514585241675377, -0.031704697757959366, 0.05246025696396828, -0.005976556800305843, -0.05553240701556206, 0.05239863321185112, -0.026954323053359985, 0.006418548058718443, 0.05994999781250954, 0.018443774431943893, 0.015780022367835045, 0.043515708297491074, -0.08914439380168915, 0.0473526194691658, 0.027303094044327736, -0.0648961290717125, 0.020315326750278473, 0.06462042778730392, -0.0316028855741024, 0.02670031599700451, 0.03934110701084137, 0.04991529509425163, -0.003951111808419228, -0.07480873167514801, 0.04687736555933952, -0.024528339505195618, -0.0092436783015728, 0.003314510453492403, -0.07528853416442871, -0.021953744813799858, -0.016190137714147568, -0.021257461979985237, 0.029538821429014206, 0.02379830926656723, 0.04870413616299629, 0.0009080348536372185, -0.03686089813709259, -0.05489233136177063, 0.032417699694633484, 0.03588615730404854, 0.05445559695363045, -0.015513710677623749, 0.03387507051229477, 0.009956443682312965, -0.11474937945604324, 0.041173018515110016, -0.02518245205283165, -0.06516411900520325, 0.010474945418536663, 0.05293089151382446, 0.025422846898436546, -0.011341331526637077, 0.03535069152712822, -0.04726859927177429, 0.031401220709085464, -0.07236876338720322, 0.07375875860452652, -0.08379608392715454, -0.027228280901908875, -0.023476503789424896, -0.05117325484752655, 0.028043515980243683, -0.009819524362683296, 0.03350009024143219, 0.011012695729732513, 0.010867774486541748, -0.11639180779457092, 0.08722902834415436, 0.08697139471769333, -0.018179869279265404, -0.08847490698099136, -0.14060433208942413, 0.07356882840394974, 0.007983818650245667, 0.0008436696953140199, -0.10677248239517212, -0.06139315664768219, -0.012433487921953201, 0.014264674857258797, -0.027271850034594536, 0.011192797683179379, -0.005116523243486881, -0.038142018020153046, -0.031464025378227234, 0.08438006043434143, -0.0016208905726671219, -1.3486662684071068e-32, -0.05683659389615059, 0.012338551692664623, -0.04116106405854225, -0.0040157209150493145, -0.02373942919075489, -0.03515782952308655, 0.013296653516590595, -0.015761014074087143, 0.12958744168281555, -0.08336161822080612, 0.015720482915639877, -0.02788754738867283, 0.017892872914671898, -0.01973479427397251, -0.02863651141524315, -0.005113584920763969, 0.004677061457186937, 0.007014083676040173, -0.027215629816055298, 0.040023911744356155, 0.061725467443466187, 0.07161568850278854, -0.03884074464440346, 0.006602566689252853, -0.03719852864742279, 0.039524201303720474, 0.014666575938463211, -0.009652054868638515, 0.068257637321949, 0.007566928863525391, -0.0044117760844528675, -0.016505545005202293, -0.1474781036376953, 0.06791342049837112, -0.04498134180903435, -0.08560548722743988, 0.14158762991428375, 0.023614365607500076, -0.014441636390984058, -0.015820322558283806, 0.09980844706296921, 0.026319099590182304, -0.006549813784658909, 0.0593918040394783, 0.009474786929786205, -0.02075752429664135, 0.0400727316737175, -0.05302867665886879, 0.0715978816151619, -0.003145936643704772, 0.029902111738920212, -0.04484334960579872, 0.08079256862401962, 0.02633591927587986, -0.008378762751817703, 0.0827588438987732, 0.05219942703843117, -0.05521894618868828, -0.048237912356853485, -0.006349519826471806, 0.07959549874067307, 0.0985790267586708, 0.030863681808114052, -0.046494532376527786, 0.06358882784843445, 0.015473851002752781, -0.002030765637755394, 0.03549308329820633, 0.07629568874835968, -0.11101607978343964, 0.0026367604732513428, -0.05284479632973671, -0.04000629857182503, -0.08019941300153732, 0.05052195116877556, 0.03913767635822296, 0.00686877453699708, -0.06736122071743011, -0.07638749480247498, -0.031852543354034424, -0.06574739515781403, 0.037083063274621964, -0.025228731334209442, 0.024038979783654213, 0.021942047402262688, -0.0794408917427063, 0.035542599856853485, -0.0032212398946285248, 0.043012551963329315, 0.04282158613204956, -0.03751034662127495, -0.013074154034256935, 0.06807292997837067, 0.10908765345811844, -0.023895282298326492, -7.346745434233526e-8, -0.022287890315055847, -0.06070428714156151, -0.027886908501386642, 0.024606836959719658, 0.016383439302444458, -0.0522947795689106, -0.011265529319643974, -0.024111000820994377, -0.04139847680926323, -0.06616491824388504, -0.007877816446125507, 0.043656036257743835, -0.07821104675531387, 0.004510380793362856, -0.027334030717611313, 0.007329845800995827, -0.08987849205732346, -0.03768852353096008, -0.06001132354140282, -0.02950422279536724, 0.0010469559347257018, -0.005138413980603218, 0.00214427150785923, 0.028500499203801155, -0.058336351066827774, 0.060513634234666824, 0.07576921582221985, -0.002488702069967985, 0.027098525315523148, 0.029005026444792747, -0.06485005468130112, 0.015655862167477608, 0.06153502315282822, 0.020566683262586594, 0.016956375911831856, -0.07069702446460724, 0.04632286727428436, 0.04731546342372894, -0.0005309468251653016, 0.021187497302889824, -0.03366592898964882, -0.03982900455594063, 0.011958565562963486, 0.045994266867637634, 0.04439365491271019, -0.03484927490353584, -0.11403574794530869, -0.0523446649312973, 0.026421725749969482, 0.08373256772756577, -0.02484014444053173, 0.008237117901444435, -0.00896730087697506, 0.031026307493448257, 0.017927715554833412, 0.07433553040027618, -0.001966685988008976, -0.08628145605325699, -0.010762734338641167, 0.007885647006332874, 0.08911062031984329, -0.010342651978135109, 0.013343033380806446, 0.0812273919582367 ]

{ "pdf_file": "XRYHJNEQBXETTP5HKCE5THSUVASCXEG4.pdf", "text": "-----Original Message----- \nFrom: MandT@mcglewtuttle.com [mailto:MandT@mcglewtuttle.com] \nSent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 12:11 PM \nTo: AB94Comments \nSubject: rule change comments \n \nAttached please find the rule comment for John James McGlew \nMcGlew and Tuttle, P.C. \nMandT@mcglewtuttle.com \nTel: (914) 941-5600 Fax: (914) 941-5855 \nwww.mcglewtuttle.com DEPA RTMENT OF COMMERCE \nPatent and Tradema rk Office \n37 C FR Part 1 \n[Docket No.: 2005–P–067] \nRIN 0651–AB94 \nChanges to Pract ice for the Exami nation of Claims in Patent Applications \nCOMMENTS SUBMITTED BY JOH N JAMES MCGLEW\nThe USPTO is responding to the appar ent difficulty in providing qua lity examination at\nthe ra te applica tions are be ing filed. The solution proposed attempts to limit claims examined. \nRefer ence is made to the g rouping of cla ims by the B oard of Appea ls. Howeve r, such g rouping\nis not the same as what is being proposed. The proposal is limiting the claims considered. This\nis arbitrar y and does not ha ve any relationship t o the nee ds of the par ticular situation, namely the\nrequire ments as to the invention prese nted.\nThe USPTO has a n effective sy stem at prese nt, namely char ging for cla ims in ex cess of\ntwenty or charging for independent claims in excess of three. This presents a relationship\nbetween cost and the extra exami nation work. The idea that this system is to be discarded is\nunsettling a s it indi cates that the USPTO does not car e about the f ees a nd simply wants to lower\nthe workloa d. This appea rs to be shortsig hted and to be c learly the wrong approa ch.\nThe USPTO should at least maintain the tra dition of ex amining twe nty claims including\nthree independe nt claims. This claim number is believe d to come fr om what has be en\ntraditionally neede d for most ca ses, to eff ectively prese nt the application for examination. W here\nmore c laims are ne eded, the applicant should pay . Howeve r, cla ims should not be ig nored. The\nfiling f ee should be set to cover the costs. I f the ba cklog is increa sing a nd costs are rising, the fee\ncan r eflect this and the appr opriate e fforts should be made for building up the Examining Corps. \nThe fe e for extra claims should be linked to the extra costs. \nInstead of focusing on building up the Examining Corps the proposed changes essentially\nseek to limit the depth and extent of prosec ution and examination. R esourc es should be dire cted\ntoward e xamination. A g ood Ex amining Corps is a na tional resourc e. If the ne w applica tion\nbacklog is gr owing , the USPTO has fa ced this problem be fore. The tra ditional approac h of\ngrowing the USPTO and building up the Examining Corps pr ovides more c ertainty than ra tioning\nexamination. \nIt could be said that be sides the g rowing backlog of ca ses, there is another linked\nproblem, namely political pressure focused on numbers rather than quality of exami nation. This\nis particular ly a proble m with there be ing no link betwe en re venue f rom fee s and the funds\navailable to maintain the Ex amining Corps. The real thing that nee ds to be cha nged is to hire and\ntrain more Examiners and to m ake the USP TO a place where technically trained people want to\nwork. Examiners must feel that ther e is a sig nificant purpose to what they do and be r ewarded\nfinanc ially and by a sense of job well ac complished. The stag gering rate at which Examiners\nhave le ft in rec ent y ears points to not only a proble m of pay but also a problem of work environment.\nThe rules should not be changed as proposed. The USP TO proposal is too drastic with\nthe re sult unknown. The USPTO needs to be pa tient. New tec hnologie s should sti ll have a\nsignificant positive impact on costs and efficiency, as new systems b ecome more familiar. With\nelectronic filing now more use r friendly , there will be time saving s for the U SPTO and the\napplicants. F oreig n office searches c an neve r be g iven full faith and c redit (be cause of law\ndiffer ences and cla im differe nces) . Howeve r, systems that present the U S examiner w ith all prior\nart considered in r elated ma tters will have a positive effe ct as to ef ficienc y. Shrinking a nd\nstabiliz ing the backlog is possibl e. More resour ces should be dir ected now towar d the\nExamining Corps.\nJohn J ames McG lew\nRegistered Patent Attorne y\nMcGlew and Tuttle, P.C.\nScarbor ough, New Y ork" }

[ -0.08353874087333679, 0.04081038385629654, -0.004637531470507383, -0.01873456872999668, -0.09490640461444855, 0.03747940808534622, 0.009738649241626263, 0.009090468287467957, -0.05363978445529938, -0.0340244323015213, 0.04036961868405342, -0.05718303471803665, 0.030629152432084084, -0.03821733593940735, -0.03099268116056919, -0.038329511880874634, 0.023683413863182068, -0.021421754732728004, -0.08691336214542389, 0.028887270018458366, 0.019989406690001488, -0.0294800978153944, -0.08041048794984818, -0.006558021996170282, 0.041841283440589905, -0.010707422159612179, -0.009788275696337223, -0.014315039850771427, 0.0047019231133162975, -0.03225931525230408, 0.00500798225402832, -0.032184209674596786, -0.011280184611678123, 0.0025578278582543135, 0.11016211658716202, -0.009335242211818695, -0.019997036084532738, -0.023597970604896545, -0.05591690540313721, 0.03195807337760925, -0.002785419812425971, -0.040845006704330444, 0.0021956816781312227, 0.008135716430842876, -0.03454926609992981, 0.029327446594834328, -0.025682009756565094, -0.024593066424131393, 0.00628279522061348, -0.05235584080219269, -0.10615882277488708, -0.0032171839848160744, -0.035088956356048584, 0.0323016494512558, -0.07125625014305115, -0.05579691752791405, -0.023493029177188873, 0.0002502594725228846, -0.14430491626262665, 0.052237819880247116, -0.030354132875800133, 0.06922730058431625, 0.03432445600628853, 0.010544142685830593, -0.012883972376585007, 0.022779027000069618, -0.05185277760028839, -0.07929708808660507, -0.08875319361686707, -0.02520124614238739, 0.03093107044696808, -0.04103891924023628, -0.06091004237532616, 0.018925534561276436, 0.06537748873233795, -0.046485401690006256, -0.053445614874362946, 0.0752667710185051, 0.10834185779094696, -0.16905264556407928, -0.026257989928126335, 0.00954789761453867, -0.028812212869524956, -0.010802245698869228, -0.007297685369849205, -0.010890194214880466, -0.045236002653837204, -0.0175941064953804, 0.07590015232563019, -0.05019808188080788, 0.06316755712032318, -0.09902482479810715, 0.10410347580909729, -0.011530994437634945, 0.05907030776143074, 0.07851468026638031, -0.04315691068768501, 0.00460415193811059, -0.003908258397132158, 0.04666069522500038, -0.04787861928343773, -0.05985052138566971, -0.1330263316631317, 0.018515314906835556, -0.05598384886980057, 0.011355367489159107, -0.000659775163512677, 0.013384095393121243, 0.014801718294620514, 0.028665950521826744, 0.10059336572885513, 0.0414155088365078, 0.01815284788608551, -0.08343765139579773, -0.0030080070719122887, 0.05848725140094757, -0.06156341731548309, 0.06936697661876678, 0.1269463300704956, -0.1230359897017479, -0.0235089473426342, 0.021534770727157593, -0.07036665081977844, -0.05423794686794281, -0.07403361797332764, -0.0631815567612648, -0.012557732872664928, -8.367545682029275e-33, -0.01001022756099701, -0.02701326087117195, 0.006708567962050438, -0.028386974707245827, -0.010276678018271923, 0.024141376838088036, 0.03795640543103218, -0.013227853924036026, -0.0797266736626625, -0.006702658254653215, -0.024064617231488228, -0.06576931476593018, 0.040840353816747665, -0.037273239344358444, -0.02709239348769188, -0.0005736325401812792, 0.013545600697398186, 0.11457917094230652, 0.018450040370225906, 0.03720255568623543, 0.09402648359537125, -0.016779590398073196, 0.043437376618385315, 0.0649237260222435, 0.005108668003231287, -0.05801178514957428, -0.051694825291633606, 0.031783074140548706, -0.04702240601181984, 0.027467630803585052, 0.041238151490688324, -0.013871272094547749, 0.09869649261236191, 0.03224770352244377, -0.005384758114814758, 0.02653179131448269, -0.02115476317703724, -0.05553758889436722, -0.0627131536602974, 0.04558931291103363, -0.023547975346446037, 0.017295511439442635, 0.02336071990430355, 0.062402114272117615, -0.005474593956023455, 0.020242964848876, 0.01415881048887968, 0.08083775639533997, -0.02230367250740528, -0.004960351157933474, -0.06043027713894844, 0.04318449646234512, -0.009157436899840832, -0.05027054622769356, 0.0011052460176870227, -0.0303189754486084, 0.02670750394463539, 0.0778799057006836, -0.04726449400186539, -0.036692000925540924, -0.022783484309911728, -0.011293966323137283, -0.07767654955387115, -0.0009900486329570413, -0.044302962720394135, 0.052071116864681244, -0.004924908746033907, 0.009595085866749287, 0.037537042051553726, -0.0950389876961708, -0.04340390861034393, -0.02557697705924511, -0.01233946904540062, 0.005889450665563345, -0.014468866400420666, -0.06255625933408737, 0.06133759021759033, 0.024483179673552513, 0.06498361378908157, -0.057238101959228516, -0.11528351902961731, -0.048828478902578354, 0.008104998618364334, 0.04519158974289894, -0.05388354882597923, 0.008265805430710316, 0.028371194377541542, 0.018727034330368042, -0.01623673178255558, 0.02324431762099266, -0.0036461197305470705, -0.021916218101978302, -0.0045028142631053925, 0.016299821436405182, 0.1000671535730362, 1.1700322510172987e-33, 0.000444301258539781, -0.0074750883504748344, -0.003994283266365528, -0.08303999900817871, -0.009323938749730587, -0.04685388505458832, 0.029210416600108147, -0.09901811182498932, -0.017052387818694115, -0.028064830228686333, 0.05419986695051193, -0.10206305235624313, 0.07900790870189667, -0.016581224277615547, -0.04479983076453209, 0.040512196719646454, -0.000902454077731818, 0.023804670199751854, 0.01476216223090887, 0.10028163343667984, 0.029712339863181114, 0.003590656677260995, -0.04000181332230568, 0.0654401034116745, -0.008731842041015625, 0.0012110129464417696, -0.06499393284320831, -0.06472829729318619, 0.004959379322826862, -0.03799990564584732, -0.06173906847834587, -0.03515589237213135, -0.0985833927989006, 0.028076881542801857, -0.07110406458377838, -0.12141340225934982, -0.007955473847687244, -0.11665062606334686, -0.05289630964398384, -0.01990295946598053, 0.03352084010839462, -0.004343442618846893, 0.071754589676857, 0.14422087371349335, -0.0296097993850708, 0.002112167188897729, 0.033567335456609726, -0.06133968383073807, 0.012236540205776691, -0.011534933000802994, -0.0469406396150589, -0.02470647357404232, 0.032386429607868195, 0.08051241934299469, -0.005703413859009743, 0.040581244975328445, 0.002444660058245063, 0.07508702576160431, -0.019815979525446892, -0.03396991267800331, 0.11793243885040283, 0.027692707255482674, 0.01337293442338705, 0.07830030471086502, 0.09974592179059982, 0.01872074417769909, -0.06549429148435593, 0.027300342917442322, 0.07019609957933426, -0.06725267320871353, -0.0019471817649900913, -0.09181364625692368, 0.022182907909154892, -0.09672759473323822, -0.017750583589076996, 0.010576119646430016, -0.010084148496389389, -0.004145369865000248, -0.07602132111787796, 0.04832984507083893, -0.017952408641576767, -0.02040165476500988, -0.05332408472895622, 0.04352932050824165, 0.056216757744550705, 0.07092592865228653, 0.08587157726287842, -0.003179844468832016, 0.031160103157162666, 0.12068963795900345, -0.07790295034646988, 0.01979486458003521, 0.03669783100485802, 0.030680088326334953, 0.023377109318971634, -4.6157840216665136e-8, 0.03426268324255943, -0.00039533930248580873, -0.09787438809871674, -0.05824192985892296, 0.06389541178941727, -0.08002334833145142, -0.04435594752430916, -0.049416616559028625, -0.0782049223780632, 0.049521345645189285, -0.0019053309224545956, -0.00395056139677763, -0.04642479494214058, -0.021158317103981972, 0.03156176954507828, -0.05095565319061279, -0.025795070454478264, 0.03014935925602913, -0.023566143587231636, -0.002185373567044735, -0.033254195004701614, -0.06718847155570984, -0.01928497478365898, -0.006879789289087057, -0.07191656529903412, 0.028471307829022408, 0.08163129538297653, -0.007245737127959728, 0.10254118591547012, 0.025692926719784737, -0.02251683920621872, 0.010822882875800133, 0.02901965007185936, -0.038864616304636, 0.005265794228762388, 0.010108206421136856, -0.021915482357144356, 0.0419456921517849, 0.037579819560050964, 0.023093517869710922, -0.05259103327989578, 0.06105700135231018, 0.03663165867328644, 0.09790315479040146, 0.07386046648025513, -0.008370872586965561, -0.08455464988946915, -0.024716876447200775, 0.01006390806287527, -0.032606739550828934, -0.07522198557853699, -0.04885871708393097, -0.013220717199146748, 0.021637236699461937, 0.003964129835367203, 0.04692531004548073, 0.005946533288806677, 0.032644178718328476, -0.02545810118317604, 0.0530649796128273, -0.012032842263579369, -0.03475009277462959, 0.09966202825307846, 0.023473400622606277 ]

{ "pdf_file": "RUW5HYZIHK3VYBQE2PL4OZ3KT2S2SPVO.pdf", "text": "Secretary of State use onlyTo the Secretary of State of Idaho\nPursuant to the provisions of Sec. 53-3-1001(e) and Sec. 53-3-105(c), Idaho Code, the undersignedlimited liability partnership states that it hereby cancels its statement of qualification as a limitedliability partnership and for that purpose submits the following statement:\n1. The name of the limited liability partnership is:\n____________________________________________________________________________\n2. The name which it used in Idaho is:\n____________________________________________________________________________\n3. It revokes the authority of its registered agent in the State of Idaho to accept service of process and\nconsents that service of process in any action, suit or proceeding based upon any cause of actionarising in the State of Idaho during the time it was authorized to transact business therein maythereafter be made on it by registered or certified mail to the limited liability partnership at theaddress listed in item 4 below.\n4. The post office address to which process against the limited liability partnership may be mailed is\n______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________CANCELLATION OF\nSTATEMENT OF QUALIFICATION OF\nLIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP\n(Instructions on back of application)239\ng:\\corp\\forms\\cancel_llp.pmd\nRev. 11/2007 Typed NameTyped Name\nTyped Name1)\n2)\n3)Signature of at least 2 partners: INSTRUCTIONS\n1. Complete and submit the application in duplicate original.\n2. Enclose the appropriate fee:\na. The filing fee is $30.00\nb. If expedited service is requested, add $20.00 to the filing fee.c. If the fees are to be paid from the filing party’s pre-paid customer account, conspicuously\nindicate the customer account number in the cover letter or transmittal document.\nPursuant to Idaho Code § 67-910(6), the Secretary of State’s Office may delete a business entity filingfrom our database if payment for the filing is not completed.\n3. Mail or deliver to:\nOffice of the Secretary of State\n450 N 4th StreetPO Box 83720Boise ID 83720-0080\n4. If you have questions or need help, call the Secretary of State’s office at (208) 334-2301." }